You can also think of it in reverse. 2x2=4. You have a pile of two apples twice, which makes four apples. How many piles of zero apples would you need to get four apples?

Let's look at numbers very close to 0

1/.1=10

1/.01=100

1/.0000001=10,000,000

Etc. The closer you get to dividing by 0, the closer your answer tends towards infinity (and negative infinity if you come from the negative direction.)

So why would you arbitrarily define 1/0 to be 0? It doesn't give you any extra predictive power. It doesn't really lead to much, and you still have to leave it out in any situation where you're not defining it. It's just not a very useful definition.

Sure! If you're looking where to start, Happiness Trap (2nd edition) by Russ Harris is incredible.

It’s a bit more well known than that. There is a maximum speed at which anything in the Universe can travel based on the constraints of General Relativity. Things with no mass must travel that speed. Anything with mass is slower. So the only way something could be faster, is if it had negative mass, which does not exist.

There could be. But all our physics* implies that any such thing would be unable too interact with us slower-than-light beings. Like, at all, not even in the weakest sense. Then it boils down to the question of what "exists" means; can things "exist" that we cannot, will never, nor could ever in any way detect?

The material/scientific version says no, because either Occam's razor or it not being testable makes it pointless for it. Quite a few religions allow such concepts, though. Same with Science-Fantasy, with parallel universes and all.

*: Which could be completely wrong, we have just found it to be accurate to a very high degree and probability.

So if you take 10 items and put them in 2 groups, you have 5 items per group. (10÷2=5) If you take 10 items and put them in 1 group, you have 10 items. (10÷1=10) If you take 0 items and put them in 100 groups, you have 0 items per group. (0÷100=0)

But there is no way to put 10 items in 0 groups, you still have 10 items, so it wouldn't be zero, but they're not grouped at all so it's not a number (like 10), so you get 10÷0 is invalid or null.

People who are larger (either taller or fatter) require more room, and tend to weigh more (in both cases) -> so if they accidentally bump into the plugged headphone jack they are more likely to cause damage.

It sounds plausible on paper, but this is just Reddit-level-research, so maybe it's completely unrelated! maybe you're just unlucky on flights.

This is wrong and it makes no sense

I was just on an Kenyan Airways flight 24 hours ago and their 787-8 had two-prong jacks

Please read this entire message

Your submission has been removed for the following reason(s):

• ELI5 requires that you search the ELI5 subreddit for your topic before posting. Users will often either find a thread that meets their needs or find that their question might qualify for an exception to rule 7. Please see this wiki entry for more details (Rule 7).

If you would like this removal reviewed, please read the detailed rules first. If you believe this submission was removed erroneously, please use this form and we will review your submission.

[deleted]

I mean I was on a 6 hour flight lately but not intercontinental. I think in general as airlines modernize their fleets these systems will be removed. I remember a few years ago even less than 6 hours flights had small foldable TVs in the ceilings and the audio jack, but they're slwoly getting rid of those. On the last flight I was on you could track the flight path and other things that would normally be in physical form (catalogues etc) by connecting to onboard WiFi on your cellphone, even if you didn't pay to access the rest of the internet.

[deleted]

Man, charging a fee to use shitty airplane headphones is entrapment...

Think about what dividing means with a concrete example.

Let's say you have 4 apples and want to divide those into 2 piles. So that's 4 divided by 2. You get 2 piles of 2 apples each right?

Great. Now take that same pile of 4 apples and divide it into zero piles. You can't do it, can you? No matter what you do, you're left with some number of piles of apples. Short of making the apples cease to exist, you can't divide them into zero piles, hence you can't divide by zero.

It gets more complicated to use the apple example when you get into negative numbers and such, but this is a straight-forward example for ELI5.

But it does not really answer the question: why can light not be even faster? Why are there not other massless things that are faster than light?

[removed]

The performance of the consoles isn't infinite, developers may still need to either make such a decision, or create multiple profiles and let the user select.

As far as I understand we do not know it, we think that the speed of light is a maximum possible speed. And we know that all of our post observations and consequences of observations and various old and new observations confirm this fact, but.. its still a theory.

At c as well. For example, if the sun suddenly disappeared we wouldn't know about it in any way for 8 minutes or so. Then the lights would go out and the Earth's path through space would change.

Same speed, c.

The effects of gravity propagate at the same speed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_of_gravity

This is one of the best actual ELI5s I've seen before.

More like it creates "placenta", even when unfertilized.

So what do you do personally when no one is around.. do you whisper or not?