Poll: Is zero a number? (Read before voting)

[Nylarathotep]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

0's value (funny you should say it has a value, like all numbers) is contained within the quotation marks:
""
Or, if you want to be pissy and say I didn't answer your question (which I did [wanna argue about that?]) how about this:
0 = 0

Nope.
As defined by the others, and theyer mathemation, its definition is nil.
Not likely to happen, given that everything he has supplied so far has roughly amounted to 0.
What is the defintion of nil?

that's why I'm not answering until a get a non-recursive definition of the value of 1

Not likely, given that what he has supplied so far equates roughly to 0.

Here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_(number)
Theres the deffinition on 1.

to quote your ultimate definitive source (wikipedia):
"1 (one) is a number, numeral, and the name of the glyph representing that number. It represents a single entity, the unit of counting or measurement."
Says right there that it's representative. 1 is not tangeable, as you keep insisting. It's an idea, which expresses a simplistic quantity.

its tangable. Because its a single entity. The "unit of counting or measurement."
Thats more then tangable. There can be "a single entity of rice" infront of me.

Hah. No, silly. There you go putting the number you're talking about INTO context. All I've been saying this whole time is that NO number has meaning without context (particularly 0). And that you're annoying

 

[righthead]

Name one single trait that any other number has that zero does not and you have an argument. You can add, subtract, divide or multiply with 0, just like any other number.

What you're trying to do is philosophically argue away a mathmatical fact by coming up with alternate terms of expressing things then claming that because you have done this, the actual term isn't valid.

Exmaple: "I can also say no apples are in my room. Is 'no' a number? Absolutely not."

If I have 6 apples in my room, I might say 'There are 6 apples in my room' or I might say 'There are half a dozen apples in my room'. Half a dozen is not a number. So by your logic, neither is 6.

Isn't logic fun?

Yeah, especially when you use it wrong!^_^

 

[Zacharine]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

Are we talking of basic algebra, set theory, propositional logic, abstract algebra, lattice theory, category theory, recursion theory or something else?

Why? are there different rules for them all?

if so, that means that my idea of 0 having a different use then numbers can be true.
So by asking that and answering it, you could seal your fate~

Well then, let me just list some of those.

Basic algerbra: 0+A=A and 0xA=0
Propositional logic, 0= "false"
set theory, 0 = empty set viewed as a well-ordered set.
abstract algebra, 0= neutral element for addition and an absorbing element for multiplication.
lattice theory, 0= bottom element of a bounded lattice.
recursion theory, 0 can be Turing degree of the partial computable functions.
in others, f(x) = 0 so that function f is a point x in the domain of the function

these are all values for zero, and meaningful uses for zero as a number.

Of course, if you can't understand what I wrote above, that is simply your failure.

I said it once, I'll say it again.

reject your definition of 'number' as useless and archaic
EDIT: as a final note, this "Why? are there different rules for them all?"

shows that you understand exactly nothing of how mathematics is formed.

 

[Nylarathotep]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

Are we talking of basic algebra, set theory, propositional logic, abstract algebra, lattice theory, category theory, recursion theory or something else?

Why? are there different rules for them all?

if so, that means that my idea of 0 having a different use then numbers can be true.
So by asking that and answering it, you could seal your fate~

Well then, let me just list some of those.

Basic algerbra: 0+A=A and 0xA=0
Propositional logic, 0= "false"
set theory, 0 = empty set viewed as a well-ordered set.
abstract algebra, 0= neutral element for addition and an absorbing element for multiplication.
lattice theory, 0= bottom element of a bounded lattice.
recursion theory, 0 can be Turing degree of the partial computable functions.
in others, f(x) = 0 so that function f is a point x in the domain of the function

these are all values for zero, and meaningful uses for zero as a number.

Of course, if you can't understand what I wrote above, that is simply your failure.

I said it once, I'll say it again.

reject your definition of 'number' as useless and archaic

/agree

 

[Eternalsun]

Its a number get over it. Maths 10 take away 10 is 0 done.
And Ive never had any apples in my pocket so there is 0 apples in my pocket.

 

[kouriichi]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

Are we talking of basic algebra, set theory, propositional logic, abstract algebra, lattice theory, category theory, recursion theory or something else?

Why? are there different rules for them all?

if so, that means that my idea of 0 having a different use then numbers can be true.
So by asking that and answering it, you could seal your fate~

Well then, let me just list some of those.

Basic algerbra: 0+A=A and 0xA=0
Propositional logic, 0= "false"
set theory, 0 = empty set viewed as a well-ordered set.
abstract algebra, 0= neutral element for addition and an absorbing element for multiplication.
lattice theory, 0= bottom element of a bounded lattice.
recursion theory, 0 can be Turing degree of the partial computable functions.
in others, f(x) = 0 so that function f is a point x in the domain of the function

these are all values for zero, and meaningful uses for zero as a number.

Of course, if you can't understand what I wrote above, that is simply your failure.

I said it once, I'll say it again.

reject your definition of 'number' as useless and archaic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

 

[Phoenixlight]

Zero is a real number, I have zero USB 3.0 connector cables, this is fact.

 

[kouriichi]

Oh, wait wait wait.
:0 i found something intresting on wikipedia.
"In mathematics, the definition of number has been extended over the years to include such numbers as zero, negative numbers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, and complex numbers."

So originally, 0 wasnt a number. They had to change the rule to make it a number?

 

[Nylarathotep]

snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

That assumes, of course, that a placeholder cannot be a number (which numbers are).

 

[Nylarathotep]

Oh, wait wait wait.
:0 i found something intresting on wikipedia.
"In mathematics, the definition of number has been extended over the years to include such numbers as zero, negative numbers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, and complex numbers."

So originally, 0 wasnt a number. They had to change the rule to make it a number?

What what what? It IS a number?
Thanks for clarifying that, kthnxbye.

 

[righthead]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

0's value (funny you should say it has a value, like all numbers) is contained within the quotation marks:
""
Or, if you want to be pissy and say I didn't answer your question (which I did [wanna argue about that?]) how about this:
0 = 0

Nope.
As defined by the others, and theyer mathemation, its definition is nil.
Not likely to happen, given that everything he has supplied so far has roughly amounted to 0.
What is the defintion of nil?

that's why I'm not answering until a get a non-recursive definition of the value of 1

Not likely, given that what he has supplied so far equates roughly to 0.

Here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_(number)
Theres the deffinition on 1.

True, but you can go there for the definition of 0 as well.
Also I see no mention of a value.

This is the "concept of value"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity
gogogo!
I want an answer.

by that definition, wouldn't the value of 1 be 1? if not, what is it?

yes. the value of one by definition is one. "It represents a single entity." i.e. One.

that's recursive, in such a manner it would be said that the value of zero is by definition zero. It represents the "additive identity of integers real numbers and a and many other algebraic structures." i.e. 1+0=1

 

[kouriichi]

snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

That assumes, of course, that a placeholder cannot be a number (which numbers are).

So your saying 0 is not a nmber, but a place holder?

 

[Zacharine]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

Are we talking of basic algebra, set theory, propositional logic, abstract algebra, lattice theory, category theory, recursion theory or something else?

Why? are there different rules for them all?

if so, that means that my idea of 0 having a different use then numbers can be true.
So by asking that and answering it, you could seal your fate~

Well then, let me just list some of those.

Basic algerbra: 0+A=A and 0xA=0
Propositional logic, 0= "false"
set theory, 0 = empty set viewed as a well-ordered set.
abstract algebra, 0= neutral element for addition and an absorbing element for multiplication.
lattice theory, 0= bottom element of a bounded lattice.
recursion theory, 0 can be Turing degree of the partial computable functions.
in others, f(x) = 0 so that function f is a point x in the domain of the function

these are all values for zero, and meaningful uses for zero as a number.

Of course, if you can't understand what I wrote above, that is simply your failure.

I said it once, I'll say it again.

reject your definition of 'number' as useless and archaic

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

direct quote:

word number is used for both the abstract object and the symbol, as well as for the word for the number. In addition to their use in counting and measuring, numerals are often used for labels (telephone numbers), for ordering (serial numbers), and for codes (e.g., ISBNs). In mathematics, the definition of number has been extended over the years to include such numbers as zero, negative numbers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, and complex numbers.

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

Then that means you must construct a new branch of mathematics based on that definition.

It has no bearing on existing branches, and oyu cannot call them wrong as you simply declare one of their basic axioms false.

This is perfectly allowed. See the birth of non-euclidean geometry for example.

But it also means existing mathematics does not care one iota what you have to say until you have constructed the new axioms, and even then your own rules only apply to your own branch. And you cannot use the rules of existing branches without accepting their axioms.

And once you've done that, we'll discuss the utility of those axioms, and thus your branch of mathematics.

So get defining your axioms for the branch of math where zero is not a number. We will see what you come up with, but I doubt it will have the versatility of the branches that define zero succesfully.

 

[righthead]

Oh, wait wait wait.
:0 i found something intresting on wikipedia.
"In mathematics, the definition of number has been extended over the years to include such numbers as zero, negative numbers, rational numbers, irrational numbers, and complex numbers."

So originally, 0 wasnt a number. They had to change the rule to make it a number?

Probably. I don't recall having heard of any proof that derived the fact that 0 was a number from other know mathematical axioms, which is the other possibility of what happened. I imagine if that was the case it probably happened between the 7th and 11th century ad, if the greeks didn't define it.

 

[silvermorning624]

We only use zero behind one in ten to show there are ten ones instead of writing them all out. It is not hard to see that many advanced mathematical equations would take more pages then they already do if we wrote out every number in ones. What is the difference between 10 and 01? Nine, correct? The zero in front of the one indicates there is no value before that, whereas we put the zero behind the one and suddenly there are nine ones after that one. You can apply this concept to one hundred or one thousand, ect. I do believe that the idea of zero is just that, an abstract idea. The statement zero is an number is a paradox. A number by definition has value, and while zero has no value(zero meaning nothing, void) the idea of having no value gives is value. The value of no value. I do not believe it to exist as we conceive it. No where, in nature, can nothing be found. Even in the "vacuum" of space there is still energy.

 

[Danzaivar]

I got something to blow OP's mind right here.

In the centigrade measurement of temperature, 0C is when water freezes. It does not however, mean "no heat at all"; that belongs to ~-273C (or 0 Kelvin using a difference scale). It's just another point of measurement on the scale that let's us use a base 10 numeral system (Decimals).

Considering that a number is just a representation of a value, and it can be used to represent a value within a domain, 0 is a number. Even if it represents nothingness, it's still representing something. Unless you are using a domain where nothingness is an impossibility, but that's not every scenario.

 

[kouriichi]

One last question. If you can answer this i'll give it all up, and present you all the coveted "You win this drug on debate trophy". XD

What is 0's value.
Thats the only question i'll ask,
and i only want your final answer.

0's value (funny you should say it has a value, like all numbers) is contained within the quotation marks:
""
Or, if you want to be pissy and say I didn't answer your question (which I did [wanna argue about that?]) how about this:
0 = 0

Nope.
As defined by the others, and theyer mathemation, its definition is nil.
Not likely to happen, given that everything he has supplied so far has roughly amounted to 0.
What is the defintion of nil?

that's why I'm not answering until a get a non-recursive definition of the value of 1

Not likely, given that what he has supplied so far equates roughly to 0.

Here you go
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_(number)
Theres the deffinition on 1.

True, but you can go there for the definition of 0 as well.
Also I see no mention of a value.

This is the "concept of value"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantity
gogogo!
I want an answer.

by that definition, wouldn't the value of 1 be 1? if not, what is it?

yes. the value of one by definition is one. "It represents a single entity." i.e. One.

that's recursive, in such a manner it would be said that the value of zero is by definition zero. It represents the "additive identity of integers real numbers and a and many other algebraic structures." i.e. 1+0=1

yes and no.
"The value, or number, zero is not the same as the digit zero"
So 0 doesnt equal 0

 

[Nylarathotep]

snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

That assumes, of course, that a placeholder cannot be a number (which numbers are).

So your saying 0 is not a nmber, but a place holder?

So, you're still being intentionally obtuse after saying that 0 is a number?
And yes I was- BECAUSE it's a placeholder, it's a number.
Your favourite source of absolute truth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placeholder

 

[kouriichi]

snip
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number
Use that definition then

And considering that i said, it could have a different rule from other numbers.
You just agreed with me by posting that. xD 0 can be a place holder and not a number.

That assumes, of course, that a placeholder cannot be a number (which numbers are).

So your saying 0 is not a nmber, but a place holder?

So, you're still being intentionally obtuse after saying that 0 is a number?
And yes I was- BECAUSE it's a placeholder, it's a number.
Your favourite source of absolute truth: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Placeholder

I dont read number anywhere in there.
infact ctrl+F doesnt find the word number anywhere on the page.

It might fit "Free variables and bound variables, symbols that will later be replaced by some literal string", but that doesnt make it a number. That makes it a symbol or variable.

 

[drdamo]

Lets make this even simpler even tho this might have been said before:

If 0 is an actual number, then how come it is still impossible to devide another number by 0?
As said: Its a placeholder for the lack of either a negative or a positive number.

(sidenote: Wiki != truth != God; This is the first thing they said on my college: "If Your only source is Wiki, then you are not allowed to use it")