√ x when x < 0 was impossible using real numbers. Then, one day some guy decided that i = √ -1 and suddenly we can work with negative square roots. Which is still quite weird, but I suppose is valid (?)
​
But there still stuff we can’t calculate in any of the number sets we have. Something we see much earlier than roots: division by 0.
​
I get why x / 0 = x is false. Basically that would mean that 1 = 0, which is absurd (reductio ad absurdum). Ok. I don’t quite get why x/0 = 0 is false, but I’m sure there’s a contradiction somewhere that would make this impossible (if it was that simple, division by 0 would have been solved thousand of years prior). But if we can simply invent a number that doesn’t exists and it can fit maths no problem such as i = √-1 why can’t we make a number n = 0^(-1)?
​
I also know the concept of limits but lim x->0 f(x) just means that x gets really close to the value of 0 but is never quite there so yeah, I don’t think that solves the issue.
In: Mathematics
You can define division by zero, but you’ll have to drop one or more of the properties you had. Division was introduced as the reverse to multiplication, in the sense that (x/y)*y=x. This will no longer hold when you allow y=0.
Going from real numbers to complex doesn’t break anything to do with how arithmetic works, which is nice, but we have to give up order (less than), at least the nice one we had and how it interplays with arithmetic.
This kind of trade-off is very common in math.
Latest Answers