The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Domr
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

6*0(6), so 6 sodas multiplied by 0 is 6, becaus they equation dosnt happen

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 7 votes the winner is...
Domr
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,153 times Debate No: 65473
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (89)
Votes (7)

 

vi_spex

Pro

6*0=0, is a false equation, what it really means is 6, because you can not destroy the 6 sodas so you still have them
Domr

Con

Thank you Pro for creating this Mathematical Debate.

My opponent claims:
6 x 0 = [6]. Or 6 multiplied by 0 equals 6

To solve this equation we must first understand what multiplication is:

**The multiplication of two whole numbers is equivalent to the addition of one of them with itself as many times as the value of the other one; for example, 3 multiplied by 4 (often said as "3 times 4") can be calculated by adding 3 copies of 4 together:


3+3+3+3 = 12 or 4+4+4 = 12

** http://en.wikipedia.org...

This works in several cases. I will give one more example, and break it down, before diving into my opponents equations.

5 x 6 = ?

Well, 5+5 = 10 +5 = 15 +5 = 20 +5 = 25 +5 = 30!
This will work oppositely if you were to add 6 together five times.
Therefore, 5 x 6 = 30


Now let's look at my opponents equation

6 x 0 = ?

My opponent claims 6x0= 6. I will show you why this is mathematically wrong.
Let's break this down the same way I broke down the previous equation. We want to add 6 together 0 times for find an answer:

You're equation is blank at this point, because if you adding 6 to itself ZERO times. you are left with nothing. Zero = nothing.

Now if you flip the equation, you want add 0 to itself 6 times for find an answer, you can right that out. Here is how it would look:

0+0+0+0+0+0 = 0.

Therefore, in both instances 6 x 0 (6 multiplied by 0) = 0.

There is not mathematical way to prove it would equal 6. I urge my opponent to try, but he will be unsuccessful.

This is a link to a multiplication table showing Zero's, to also prove my answer.
http://www.eduplace.com...




Now, my opponent adds a interesting take on this problem: " because you can not destroy the 6 sodas so you still have them"

Pro is trying to create a world problem to create a case for himself. However, he doesn't complete the word problem as there is no way to use that word problem to make any equation. He just states he has 6 sodas, that cannot be destroyed. I will create a short word problem to also achieve my answer. If my opponent comes up with a better suited word problem, that can be equated and solved mathematically, I will solve that problem as well (or point out the flaws on how it doesn't apply to the equation 6 multiplied by 0

Word Problem:


A local store is having a one day special! Every child that enters the store on this one day is given 6 pieces of candy. However, on this day, NO children enter the store. How many children have candy?



6(six) pieces of candy MULTIPLIED BY 0(Zero) Children EQAULS Zero. (No child has any candy, because no child entered the store this day)

6 x 0 = 0



Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

I don't claim 6*0=6, the claim is 6*0(6), the equation dosnt equal so it just dosnt happen

0=nothing=information=false and truth
1=something=matter=true

1+0=1, is a false equation, the equation dosnt happen, so its just 1, so 1+0(1)
1+0+4+0=1+4=5
=
1+4=5

what you are doing is false, 5+5 is not 10+5. is(=, equal), my shoe is blue
5*6=30
this would be true, 21+9=10+20=5+25=30

0*6(6), as the equation dosnt happen, you cant not multiply nothing by something

0=creation and destruction=nothing
1=transformation=something

matter can never be created and destroyed
Domr

Con

My opponent has made numerous point against my math.

I will start with my 5 * 6 = 30. And how I broke it down.

"what you are doing is false, 5+5 is not 10+5. is(=, equal), my shoe is blue"

What I was doing was completely accurate, however misread by my opponent.

I will re-do the same breakdown, however, I will space it out to hopefully make more sense.
5*6=30
OR

5+5+5+5+5+5 = 30
OR

5+5 = 10 ... 10+5 = 15 ... 15+5 = 20 ... 20+5 = 25 ... 25+5 = 30


You are allowed to add, or subract, or multiply by Zero. It is a very valid equation, especially to help solve word problems like my own.

While it may not necessary to right out the full equation, the equation is still valid.

1+0=1 IS VALID.

1 * 0 = 0 IS VALID.


My initial word problem shows how multiplying by zero is a legitmate mathematical problem. The equation exists and is valid.

Proven by the multiplication table given in round one, it also proves mulitplying by zero has an answer in the mathematical equation.

Unless my opponent can disprove math, I have won this debate.



Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

no its false, 5 stones are not 10 stones, the fore they do not equal each other

ah you get it now thou :)

it is impossible to add 0 to 1, therefore you just have 1, the equation dosnt go through, it just dosnt happen

1+0=1 is multiplication failure
1+0(1)
it is the equivalent of saying, don't add nothing, no stickers, no times, to my 1 soda. ai?

1*0=0, the answer is valid, but the equation is invalid, so its 1*0(1)

what happens if I don't punch you in the face but I just think it? nothing
what happens if I don't stop breathing?

im proving math has an absolute definition

0=nothing
1=something

you can never show me 0 bananas, I know this is true
Domr

Con

My opponent has again misread my equation. 5 (stones) + 5 (stones) = 10 stones. This was merely an example of multiplication that has misconstrued by my opponent.

My opponent is thinking literally, in the physical life, that a math equation, written out, is not valid.

This is wrong. My word problem, as I mentioned last round (which has gone without a rebuttal, therefore still stands), is a prime example of why the equation for multiplying by zero is valid.

My opponent has failed to show why multiplying by zero is invalid, and he has not disproved my word problem.

My word problem is a valid reason to write out the equation, and has a valid and legitimate answer.




Here is the word problem again:

A local store is having a one day special! Every child that enters the store on this one day is given 6 pieces of candy. However, on this day, NO children enter the store. How many children have candy?



6(six) pieces of candy MULTIPLIED BY 0(Zero) Children EQAULS Zero. (No child has any candy, because no child entered the store this day)




Debate Round No. 3
vi_spex

Pro

5+5 = 10 +5 = 15 +5 = 20 +5 = 25 +5 = 30!

is what you wrote..

5+5=10 is true, but does not equal 15+5

you can not add nothing to something, therefore it doesn't happen, but we can share 2 sodas, 2/2=1, happens in reality

you can not multiply by 0 in reality, therefore the true answer is what y"u try to multiply with 0, as nothing happens and 3 real sodas for eksample can not be destroyed, can never become 0
Domr

Con

I am not saying 5+5 = 10 which equals 15+5.

I am adding 5 6 separate times to come to thirty as an example of how multiplication works. You are reading it as one different problem when it is 6 different ones.

Look at everything I wrote to figure it out:

5*6=30
OR

5+5+5+5+5+5 = 30
OR

5+5 = 10 ... 10+5 = 15 ... 15+5 = 20 ... 20+5 = 25 ... 25+5 = 30


But anyways, my opponent has still completely ignore my word problem. Pro keeps stating about destroying or creating (sodas) in this instance. Or any material object.

His Word problem of having 6 sodas, and multiplying them makes no sense. How are we multiplying the sodas? What other entity is being used as the multiplier.

MY word problems shows the legitimacy of multiplying by zero.

Until my opponent can create his own word problem that suggest multiplying by zero, or the inability to do so, my word problem stands, and multiplying by zero is a valid mathematical equation.
Debate Round No. 4
vi_spex

Pro

you did do that.. you even corrected your mistake.. stop acting, go back and look at what you wrote

as you write it now you corrected it.. good job LOL

destruction=from something to nothing
creation=from nothing to something

matter can only transform

and your claim is that the sodas are destroyed, which is to say 6*0=0, where as transformation only allows this 6*0(6)
Domr

Con

My opponent has made no claim to show how the mathematical equation is invalid: 6 multiplied by 0.

I have clearly represented how multiplication works. My opponent has not understood my examples, and still claims they are wrong, or that I corrected them after typing them. Which I have not. I copied at pasted my example using OR from the previous rounds.

I have used sources to show multiplication, and the multiplication table showing how multiplying by Zero works, and is a valid math equation.

My opponent is constantly bringing up the destruction of matter, however that has nothing to with math, nor this debate.

He does not understand basic mathematics.

I have even given a word problem to prove why writing an equation out, using the multiplication of zero is valid.


Multiplying by zero is not the destruction of matter.

You CANNOT just say that, You have 6 sodas, and if you multiply them by zero, you are destroying matter. That is NOT a word problem. There is no set up for an equation in that problem. There is no rhyme or reason to HOW the multiplication of Zero makes any effect on the sodas, because you aren't doing anything to the sodas physically. You are just stating you are multiplying by zero,

Unfortunately, my opponent has shown a lack of knowledge for basic math.

This is the word problem on more time to show the validity of multiplying by zero:


Now, my opponent adds a interesting take on this problem: " because you can not destroy the 6 sodas so you still have them"

Pro is trying to create a world problem to create a case for himself. However, he doesn't complete the word problem as there is no way to use that word problem to make any equation. He just states he has 6 sodas, that cannot be destroyed. I will create a short word problem to also achieve my answer. If my opponent comes up with a better suited word problem, that can be equated and solved mathematically, I will solve that problem as well (or point out the flaws on how it doesn't apply to the equation 6 multiplied by 0

Word Problem:



A local store is having a one day special! Every child that enters the store on this one day is given 6 pieces of candy. However, on this day, NO children enter the store. How many children have candy?

Answer:



SIX (pieces of candy per child entering the store)

MULTIPLIED BY

ZERO (children entering the store)



EQUALS .....


ZERO
(The number of children who received candy from the store)





I thank my opponent for a quick debate, we were able to finish this in a few hours. However, I see no way in which my opponent has made any valid points disproving the multiplication of zero in mathematics.

Thank you for reading.

Debate Round No. 5
89 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by chewster911 2 years ago
chewster911
Vi_spex you are making me hate babies so much, just because your profile pic is a baby
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
belief=Be lie=dead
kNow=Life
Posted by Soul.Purge 2 years ago
Soul.Purge
wow, we are living in world where basic, 5th grade math must be debated lol this is so sad... Whats next? Are you going to argue that letter A is not actually A but B? lol pointless...
Posted by ChandanB 2 years ago
ChandanB
What pro basically believes in is physical presence but not abstract/hypothetical presence. He doesnt believe in anything that isnt present in physical nature. End of discussion.
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
what they don't tell you is belief is be lie
Posted by AsianGenius 2 years ago
AsianGenius
no i don't think it's a troll. I remember learning in my psychology textbook about the many stages of development. One of them is concrete operational which people I think go through between age 7-11. vi Spex's logic belongs in this category and his arguments would make sense to kids in that cognitive development stage.http://www.simplypsychology.org... but most people on this site are above age 11 and begin using abstract thinking and are thus formal operational. http://www.simplypsychology.org...
according to psychology development no matter how hard you try to explain something to someone belonging in a previous stage of development, that person will never truly understand because their brain is developed enough to allow understanding to happen. Just like a 1year old child will not be able to understand toilet no matter how much you punish or reward or explain to the child. You simply need to wait until that part develops
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
i don't make it easy to understand, that's why its fun
Posted by gomergcc 2 years ago
gomergcc
I wish my debate with vi_spex went this easy, at least you could understand what was being said. lol
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
how do I ever eat a banana if I only see 0 bananas
Posted by vi_spex 2 years ago
vi_spex
are you serius?
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Sidewalker 2 years ago
Sidewalker
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I find it hard to believe pro was serious, in any event, his logic. reasoning, spelling, and grammar were all atrocious, seemed incoherent. Con presented a logical rebuttal, everything but sources goes to Con, I don't recall either debater using any sources, so that's a tie.
Vote Placed by Kaynex 2 years ago
Kaynex
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Troll debate
Vote Placed by Saska 2 years ago
Saska
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro makes absolutely no sense. Con explained perfectly how the math works and pro just disregards while rambling on with nonsense. Pro had terrible conduct so con wins that point. Con used the only source (actual math) so con gets that point. Pro wrote like he was texting his messages in 140 characters or less, so con wins spelling and grammar. Finally, con absolutely destroyed pro's attempt at any arguments. A sweep for con.
Vote Placed by Vere_Mendacium 2 years ago
Vere_Mendacium
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Failed to convince
Vote Placed by Tweka 2 years ago
Tweka
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con has an argument and better sources.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: pro completely fails to rebut Domr's showing that 6 of zeroes are still zero. Stop relying on the banana argument, Vi. Vi losses spelling obviously, and uses no sources.
Vote Placed by Gabe1e 2 years ago
Gabe1e
vi_spexDomrTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Let's see, better conduct, better arguments, better grammar, and more reliable sources. Domination for Con.