1/0=infinity using easy trig.?

As Detective said, some times you can assign 1/0 to be infinity, SOMETIMES. It depends on the application. For example, tan(π/2) is treated as infinity (1/0), and as such, cot(π/2) is like dividing 1 by a infinitely large number, so cot(π/2) = 0.

But, defining that 1/0 is infinity is plain retard.

There are SO many reasons of why this is not a wise thing to do. First, infinity is not a number (and there are a lot of reasons of why it can't be treated as one, see set theory), but whatever, let's pretend it is a valid answer; I'll give the most obvious fallacy on your argument:

1/0 = ∞

1 = 0 ⋅ ∞, which is absurd.

Also, parallel lines don't meet on a Euclidean plane. They just never meet, it doesn't matter if you go to infinity. It is just like this: Let's try to reduce 1 to 0, by subtracting 0 from it as many times as necessary:

1 - 0 = 1 - 0 = 1 - 0 = 1 - 0 = 1 - 0 = 1 - 0... it doesn't matter how many times you do it. It doesn't matter if you do it infinitely many times. It'll just stay as 1, because you're not taking anything (zero) from it, and similarly, parallel lines won't meet, because they're not bending at all. It doesn't matter if you go to infinity. It's not like they'll get tired as you go to infinity, bend a little bit, and then finally meet.

Lastly, believe me, mathematicians have been puzzled with this for centuries. Don't think you'll just solve the mystery all of a sudden, using high school trigonometry.

"According to euclidean geometry parallel lines meet once they reach infinity "

No, that is just wrong. According to Euclidean geometry parallel lines never intersect. But I will grant that in some non-euclidean geometries you can make that statement, by constructing it such that all lines meet at a point called infinity.

tan(90) is undefined. However, in some cases you are able to assign tan(90) to be ∞ (this is a geometric assignment, not algebraic). So you cannot make the claim that 1/0 = ∞.

1/0 is undefined.

After some thinking I realized what you were talking about with the triangle and open figure. However, the sum of the angles of a triangle is always 180 degrees, if you have two right angles, forming that third side doesn't make much sense. You have to be careful of taking ideas from non-Euclidean geometry and applying them to Euclidean geometry.

The main problem is that infinity does not exist.

And infinity is a concept, not a number. There is no largest number!

The other problem is that 0 is nothing

1 meter divided by nothing is meaningless.

When you divide 1 by a fraction, the answer is the reciprocal of the fraction.

1 ÷ 1/1,000 = 1,000

1 ÷ 1/1,000,000 = 1,000,000

1 ÷ 1/1,000,000,000 = 1,000,000,000

As the fraction gets smaller, the answer gets larger.

As the fraction approaches 0, the answer approaches infinity.

This is true.

101 = One hundred and one.

101.005 = One hundred one and five thousandths

In our number system, 0 is a place holder.

0 dollars means you don’t have any money!

1/0 is undefined.

How can you cut a 1 meter long rope into pieces which are 0 meter long?

The answer is undefined, because dividing by 0 is meaningless.

i got here upon trig to be much less confusing. Geometry in severe college replaced into the toughest for me, rather, I nonetheless think of severe college geometry is fairly harder than fairly some the college math instructions i'm taking to be undemanding...I disliked it very plenty.