This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science
related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should
explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments
should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
Use the emojis to react to an explanation, whether you're congratulating a job well done , or just really confused .
Ask specific questions about the challenge or the steps in somebody's explanation. Well-posed questions can add a lot to the discussion, but posting "I don't understand!" doesn't help anyone.
Try to contribute something new to the discussion, whether it is an extension, generalization or other idea related to the challenge.
Stay on topic — we're all here to learn more about math and science, not to hear about your favorite get-rich-quick scheme or current world events.
Markdown
Appears as
*italics* or _italics_
italics
**bold** or __bold__
bold
- bulleted - list
bulleted
list
1. numbered 2. list
numbered
list
Note: you must add a full line of space before and after lists for them to show up correctly
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.
print "hello world"
# I indented these lines
# 4 spaces, and now they show
# up as a code block.
print "hello world"
Math
Appears as
Remember to wrap math in \( ... \) or \[ ... \] to ensure proper formatting.
2 \times 3
2×3
2^{34}
234
a_{i-1}
ai−1
\frac{2}{3}
32
\sqrt{2}
2
\sum_{i=1}^3
∑i=13
\sin \theta
sinθ
\boxed{123}
123
Comments
Well, the term "a | b" just means that a divides b evenly (or b is a multiple of a). So, this means that b/a is an integer.
Thus, our first term is k/0, which (hopefully obviously) leads to wonky things. Dividing by zero is a iffy business, and usually leads to mass confusion unless you know limits, so I'm just going to say it doesn't work.
Our second term is 0/k. This always equals zero (unless k is zero, then it's even more scary). Thus, 0 | k = 0, but k | 0 is undefined (again, if you know limits, this doesn't exactly apply).
The way I always remembered it was thinking of the | as a reverse fraction of sorts. Usually, when I see a fraction written like 3/4, I read it left to right. The | just means that I read it right to left. But that's just me.
That's a good way to remember it Steven. I remember it as a rotation of 90∘ anti clockwise to go from a∣b to ab.
Of course, division by 0 leads to "wonky things", and this idea still works for k=0. k0 makes sense, so k∣0, but 0k doesn't make sense and 0∤k. However, it breaks down at 00 not making sense while 0∣0.
If you refer back to the definition, the reason why this happens is because fractions is defined as in terms of division (can't divide by 0) and the divide notation is defined in terms of multiplication (can multiply by 0).
The way I learned divisibility from my abstract algebra book states in a ring a|b implies there is some k in the ring such that ak = b. By that definition k|0 for any integer k.
Easy Math Editor
This discussion board is a place to discuss our Daily Challenges and the math and science related to those challenges. Explanations are more than just a solution — they should explain the steps and thinking strategies that you used to obtain the solution. Comments should further the discussion of math and science.
When posting on Brilliant:
*italics*
or_italics_
**bold**
or__bold__
paragraph 1
paragraph 2
[example link](https://brilliant.org)
> This is a quote
\(
...\)
or\[
...\]
to ensure proper formatting.2 \times 3
2^{34}
a_{i-1}
\frac{2}{3}
\sqrt{2}
\sum_{i=1}^3
\sin \theta
\boxed{123}
Comments
Well, the term "a | b" just means that a divides b evenly (or b is a multiple of a). So, this means that b/a is an integer.
Thus, our first term is k/0, which (hopefully obviously) leads to wonky things. Dividing by zero is a iffy business, and usually leads to mass confusion unless you know limits, so I'm just going to say it doesn't work.
Our second term is 0/k. This always equals zero (unless k is zero, then it's even more scary). Thus, 0 | k = 0, but k | 0 is undefined (again, if you know limits, this doesn't exactly apply).
The way I always remembered it was thinking of the | as a reverse fraction of sorts. Usually, when I see a fraction written like 3/4, I read it left to right. The | just means that I read it right to left. But that's just me.
Log in to reply
That's a good way to remember it Steven. I remember it as a rotation of 90∘ anti clockwise to go from a∣b to ab.
Of course, division by 0 leads to "wonky things", and this idea still works for k=0. k0 makes sense, so k∣0, but 0k doesn't make sense and 0∤k. However, it breaks down at 00 not making sense while 0∣0.
If you refer back to the definition, the reason why this happens is because fractions is defined as in terms of division (can't divide by 0) and the divide notation is defined in terms of multiplication (can multiply by 0).
I think only k∣0 where k=0
The way I learned divisibility from my abstract algebra book states in a ring a|b implies there is some k in the ring such that ak = b. By that definition k|0 for any integer k.
Log in to reply
This is what I think