Hrm ... argumentation by reference to authority (various Ph.D. people) is a sure way to lose a scientific argument. But that isn't my only qualm. In the const

Hrm ... argumentation by reference to authority (various Ph.D. people) is a sure way to lose a scientific argument. But that isn't my only qualm. In the construction of the fields, there is a simple definition of the division function. It is intrinsically the solution of a = r * b, where r is the unknown. If a is nonzero, and b is zero, then r, the ratio, is said not to exist. Put another way, there is no real value of r that can be chosen that satisfies r * 0 = a. See [1] for example, as 0 is not an invertible element of the field over the reals. So ... I can't say I agree with their choice of 1/0 == 0. They may be free to choose any value they wish, but then from an aesthetic viewpoint, do they really want to surprise the user? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplicative_group https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplicative_group