We apply limits to the ‘0’ in any context where the denominator ‘0’ should be corrected so that it should become a part of the numerator and we can find out an approximate meaning to the terms 1/0, 2/0 etc. Here we may note that division of ‘1’ by ‘0’ is impossible without applying some error to the actual ‘0’. In circumstances where ‘0’ or ‘’ is believed to be something which is not actually equal to it, to apply limits to those terms is essential in Mathematics in many contexts and a branch called calculus deals with the matter. Offering my explanations limiting to the context under consideration, I may clarify that ‘0’ and ‘’ used in this article without applying limits are actual ‘0’ and ‘’ and they cannot be limited to any extent. Here ‘0’ is the actual crossing point of the positive gravitational forces to the negative gravitational forces and hence the ‘0’ mentioned in the article is real. The ‘’ in this context cannot be limited to any extent and hence the ‘’ mentioned in the article is also real. We should consider the fact that the original ‘0’ should not be disturbed and 10 X 0 must be considered as ‘0’ itself as per any modern mathematics and we should not apply any limit to the above fundamental aspect of mathematics in any context where its limitation is not essential. Any way while the numerator and the denominator are original ‘0’s, the term ‘0/0’ need not undergo any limitation as per calculus and if we apply limits to ‘0’ in the context under consideration, it will destroy the accuracy of the condition that exists actually at the centre of mass of a heavenly body. Further we do not want to get the approximate value of ‘0/0’ in this context by applying calculus; because we get the accurate value of the ‘0/0’, in terms of the axial rotations about the centre of mass of a body, with reference to the circumferential movements of that ‘heavenly’ body. So, we should not apply limits i.e. correction to the ‘0/0’ in the above context; because it will ruin the accuracy of the reality.

    According to an apostle of astrophysics, such a point inside a heavenly body cannot give rise to ‘’ rotations. I think perhaps he may say that a small seed cannot contain many hereditary properties of a great tree inside it and perhaps he may also say that ‘centre of gravity’ must only be an imaginary point.

     In his reply the Editor of a Physics Journal clearly indicates that his knowledge about the subject is little because he could not beat even one sentence of my paper with reference to any modern finding that can probably stand against my statements. As we all know a fundamental aspect of science clear like a crystal can never be altered any more, any how by anybody. But he blamed me that the reference I quoted in my article was not modern and rejected its publication.

    I am an undergraduate and I understand Deans and Faculties are not ready to entertain me; but I present my article to the scholars and the public all over the world because I believe you will do what I could not do.
 

The Author ( T.A. RADHAKRISHNAN.)