This question originated from the Australian encryption debate, but I am mainly asking about the US. Just to keep things simple (if a bit absurd), suppose the US passed a law that says, "Every citizen is required `to provide the government with a valid solution to the equation 0x=50, and will oth...
@RonBeyer Infinity does not satisfy the equation and therefore it is not a solution: Substituting x with ∞ and subtracting 50 from both sides of the equation would have to lead to 0∞ - 50 = 0, which we know is false regardless of whether 0∞ is defined as 0 (in which case 0-50=-50) or as ∞ (in which case ∞-50=∞). Thus, citizens would still be unable to comply with that mandate or law.
@IñakiViggers: While mathematically untrue, infinity may be the correct answer; after all, the answer is being checked by the government. Wasn't there a state that declared Pi to be equal to 3, for example, and the Australian Prime Minister (who is part of the party that sparked this question) has declared "The laws of mathematics are very commendable, but the only law that applies in Australia is the law of Australia."
@sharur "Wasn't there a state that declared Pi to be equal to 3, for example" That is an urban legend. There was a bill proposed which would hive implied (not declared) an incorrect value for Pi as part of an incorrect scheme to square the circle.. But it did not pass. See Indiana Pi Bill at Wikipedia
@DavidSiegel: Fair enough, but the point (legislation is not necessarily in line ) still stands. Also, as a point of pedantry (which is ironic considering I was just wrong), I wouldn't call it an "urban legend" but rather an exaggeration in that case: per Wikipedia, it actually managed to pass the Indiana House of Representatives, purportedly unanimously, which obviously isn't a law, but is a lot farther than many other...bad, ideas get.
@sharur True, but it has often been asserted that the bill was in support of biblical literalism (which has sometimes argued for Pi=3) while it was actually idiosyncratic mathematical crankiness. The legend is a) that the bill said pi=3; b) that it was biblically motivated; and c) that it passed. I always get a giggle out of the suggestion that the bill be referred to the committee on swamps. Your basic point is, of course, valid.
@RonBeyer Let x= 50/0. Then 0*(50/0) = 50. Apply the commutative rule, and you get 50*(0/0) = 50. Anything divided by itself is an identity, and thus equals 1: 50*(1) = 50. You could call 50/0 "infinity", but there are different scales of infinity (e.g while there are infinite numbers greater than 1, there are also infinite numbers between 0 and 1)
Aren't there already examples of this in the real-world? At least, as I remember it, many traffic laws are written in such a way that, in some situations, nobody could ever do anything. At four-way stop, if two vehicles stop at the same time, you are supposed to yield to your right. Thus, if four cars stop at the same time, everyone must yield to the person to their right and NOBODY can ever proceed. The only way for traffic continue is for someone to break the law.
@sharur The proposition that "While mathematically untrue, infinity may be the correct answer" is self-contradictory. If an answer is false (and actually proved to be false), there is no way it may be correct. And it is unclear from your comment how the government would "check" that answer.
@RobP. Your example is not impossible. (1) Everyone can just wait until a police officer arrives to break up the impasse. (2) If you can pick up your car, then you can carry it through the intersection as a pedestrian. (3) The authorities can break up the impasse by removing a stop sign. ... a better example is the NAZI regime outlawed the Jewish ethnicity - if you were born Jewish you can not stop being Jewish - at least for the purpose of the NAZI laws.
@IñakiViggers infinity may be the correct answer depending on the axioms that we start with. If the judiciary rules that infinity is a correct answer, then for the purpose of legal discussion it is.
Discussion on question by Anon: What …
Discussion on question by Anon: What …