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

[HentMas]

easy

A number is an imaginary representation of the amount of "things" (be it phisical objects, ideas, concept and all that stuff)

zero is the imaginary representation that indicates there is no amount of "things"

just as -1 is the imaginary representation that indicates the lack of 1 "thing"

so yeah, zero is a number

 

[Zacharine]

You cant replace 1 with 2 and still have 1

No, but you can replace 1 with 1/1, or 3/3, or possibly {1} or even

That is what the = sign means; the strings of symbols on boths sides are interchangeable

A symbol (1) replaced with a string (any of the above)

Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number.

Please try again.

But that means im not wrong.

Your inability to comprehend the argument does you no credit.

1 is a number that can be a placeholder for lim [n->inf] (1-1/(10)^n)

Just like i is a number that is a placeholder for squareroot of negative 1.

Thus refuting your argument.

Please try again.

 

[kouriichi]

Whoops

 

[Hoplon]

A few questions about 0.

Can you add to it?

Can you subtract from it?

Can you multiply it?

Can you divide it?

as far as i am aware all those are true for 0, making it a real number. also a highly useful concept.

 

[kouriichi]

You cant replace 1 with 2 and still have 1

No, but you can replace 1 with 1/1, or 3/3, or possibly {1} or even

That is what the = sign means; the strings of symbols on boths sides are interchangeable

A symbol (1) replaced with a string (any of the above)

Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number.

Please try again.

But that means im not wrong.

Your inability to comprehend the argument does you no credit.

1 is a number that can be a placeholder for lim [n->inf] (1-1/(10)^n)

Just like i is a number that is a placeholder for squareroot of negative 1.

Thus refuting your argument.

Please try again.

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

 

[Zacharine]

You cant replace 1 with 2 and still have 1

No, but you can replace 1 with 1/1, or 3/3, or possibly {1} or even

That is what the = sign means; the strings of symbols on boths sides are interchangeable

A symbol (1) replaced with a string (any of the above)

Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number.

Please try again.

But that means im not wrong.

Your inability to comprehend the argument does you no credit.

1 is a number that can be a placeholder for lim [n->inf] (1-1/(10)^n)

Just like i is a number that is a placeholder for squareroot of negative 1.

Thus refuting your argument.

Please try again.

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

No, you are wrong in assuming that a number is not a placeholder.

 

[kouriichi]

You cant replace 1 with 2 and still have 1

No, but you can replace 1 with 1/1, or 3/3, or possibly {1} or even

That is what the = sign means; the strings of symbols on boths sides are interchangeable

A symbol (1) replaced with a string (any of the above)

Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number.

Please try again.

But that means im not wrong.

Your inability to comprehend the argument does you no credit.

1 is a number that can be a placeholder for lim [n->inf] (1-1/(10)^n)

Just like i is a number that is a placeholder for squareroot of negative 1.

Thus refuting your argument.

Please try again.

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

No, you are wrong in assuming that a number is not a placeholder.

I never said a number cant be a place holder
i said a placeholder ((as in the placeholder itself)) is not a number.

 

[Zacharine]

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

To put this in perspective, you are asking me "Is this furniture, or made of wood?"

not realizing that the categories can and often do overlap.

 

[Mistermixmaster]

[Begin idiot voice]"Well zero is on the number line, it has to be a number then"[End idiot voice]

Sorry, had to. Anyhow, I do/did look at zero as a number, even though the OP managed to get my mind wondering... I think I'm gonna need to sit down, have some tea, then return and edit this post to tell y'all about my own opinion on this matter...

 

[Zacharine]

You cant replace 1 with 2 and still have 1

No, but you can replace 1 with 1/1, or 3/3, or possibly {1} or even

That is what the = sign means; the strings of symbols on boths sides are interchangeable

A symbol (1) replaced with a string (any of the above)

Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number.

Please try again.

But that means im not wrong.

Your inability to comprehend the argument does you no credit.

1 is a number that can be a placeholder for lim [n->inf] (1-1/(10)^n)

Just like i is a number that is a placeholder for squareroot of negative 1.

Thus refuting your argument.

Please try again.

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

No, you are wrong in assuming that a number is not a placeholder.

I never said a number cant be a place holder
i said a placeholder ((as in the placeholder itself)) is not a number.

If not all placeholders are not numbers, then some placeholders are numbers.

Zero is a placeholder. It is also a number. Now refute it, as per your original argument.

And thank you for showing that this talk of placeholders cannot prove or disprove zero being a number.

 

[kouriichi]

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

To put this in perspective, you are asking me "Is this furniture, or made of wood?"

not realizing that the categories can and often do overlap.

but is a rectangle a square? or is a square a rectangle?
They dont always over laps. Some things have 2 rules. And like 0 and 1, there are many rules.

 

[kouriichi]

[Begin idiot voice]"Well zero is on the number line, it has to be a number then"[End idiot voice]

Sorry, had to. Anyhow, I do/did look at zero as a number, even though the OP managed to get my mind wondering... I think I'm gonna need to sit down, have some tea, then return and edit this post to tell y'all about my own opinion on this matter...

if im up i cant wait to hear it~
^O^

 

[Zacharine]

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

To put this in perspective, you are asking me "Is this furniture, or made of wood?"

not realizing that the categories can and often do overlap.

but is a rectangle a square? or is a square a rectangle?
They dont always over laps. Some things have 2 rules. And like 0 and 1, there are many rules.

And you've failed to show that this applies to categories 'placeholder' and 'number'.

YOu agreed with this just now, "some placeholders can be numbers".

So you've refuted yourself.

Now, unfortunetaly, I'll have to leave for a weekend vacation. I can get back to you on sunday.

If you have further arguments by then, I'll check them out.

 

[MisterM2402]

"I have no apples" - you said that "no" wasn't a number. What if you had "some" apples, "a few" apples, "many" apples? Those aren't "numbers" but they still represent numbers ("no" or "none" representing 0).

And your last point that is underlined - your displacement is 0 but you have travelled 6 miles. You can't say you have travelled 0 miles, since you haven't, you have travelled 6.

You can't say "well there aren't 0 planes in my driveway because there are some in the sky" - the planes in the sky don't count towards the number of planes in your driveway (that number being 0 since there are none).

That is all.

 

[kouriichi]

So your saying im wrong for calling 1 a number, when you litterally just said "Therefore, 1 can be a placeholder, while simultaneously being a number"

To put this in perspective, you are asking me "Is this furniture, or made of wood?"

not realizing that the categories can and often do overlap.

but is a rectangle a square? or is a square a rectangle?
They dont always over laps. Some things have 2 rules. And like 0 and 1, there are many rules.

And you've failed to show that this applies to categories 'placeholder' and 'number'.

YOu agreed with this just now, "some placeholders can be numbers".

So you've refuted yourself.

Now, unfortunetaly, I'll have to leave for a weekend vacation. I can get back to you on sunday.

If you have further arguments by then, I'll check them out.

ok. have a nice time. Give the Mr/Mrs/Closest living family member going with you my best.
And yes, some can, but 0 isnt one of them~

 

[Blanko2]

Correct me if im wrong, but didnt Albert Einstein drop out of school? Im sure hes waaaay smarter then you will ever be

no, no he didn't
and i resent you comparing yourself with him, immensely.
especially because, even if he had, it would be no measure of how smart or stupid you are.
just because one person did one thing and succeeded or was smart does not mean that you are the same.

 

[Blanko2]

also, you're condescending with your little ""s and that makes it even harder to read anything you write without me just bursting into laughter at how silly it is

They dont always over laps.

and i think you mean overlap

 

[Folio]

Zero is a placeholder or maybe just a symbol. It's neutral. I can't really think about it. There has to be an answer!

I-I can't ... I don't know! I.. I IaaaaAAAAAARRRRRGHHHH! *SPLUT* *drops*

 

[junkmanuk]

Zero is a number, it's next to 9 on my keyboard.

It's easy to twist pseudo-logic into a question to derive some complex analysis where there is a completely adequate, simpler and, in many situations cheaper, solution.

My main headache with this modern business world is the penchant for people to over-complicate things when you just don't need to in order to create a job for themselves.

Interestingly it appears (re-reading the OP) that this question, like so many others, has descended into an argument over semantics.