Question on ratios. Does the ratio of A:B necessarily equal

bump cmon math heads

Well that depends, what do A, B, and C equal?

>>8626437
It actually doesn't depend. The statement in OP is correct.

>>8626472
unless B is zero

>>8626574
No it still works that way.

>>8626358
Yes, why wouldn't it?
What makes you think otherwise?

>>8626807

UNLESS B IS ZERO as he said, stupid, read a math textbook for once.

>>8627196
Yeah it still works with B being zero. We're talking ratios here.

>>8627196
For instance.

As 2:0, so then this is the ratio compounded of, say 4 for C, 2:4 and 4:0. 2:4 simplifies to 1:2 and one half of 4:0 is 2:0, supposing the consequent necessitates the complete absence of a unit and the antecedent does not.

>>8626358
Yes.

A/C * C/B = A/B

>>8627384
>>8627392
Do you understand a word "textbook" ?

If c is zero you're fucked.

>>8627535
Alright, fine. That I will agree with.

If A or B is zero it still works though.

>>8627535
If c = zero a+b=line AB

Wait so did anyone answer this correctly yet?

What's the right answer?

let's say the ratios are 1:2 (a:b)
but then c is 0.
That makes 1:0 and 0:2 which eventually makes 0:0.

Is this considered different than the original 1:2 ratio? It has to be right? So why is everyone saying that 0 is not important?

>>8629493
A b are lines
C is a diagonal line

C=0 leaves you with line AB