is 0 even or odd?

[Sovvolf]

Well, google says even, wiki says even and the people on here that seem to have a very firm grasp of maths (I think we have some college students studying maths and some maths teachers) say its even.... So I'd say its even.

 

[FamoFunk]

I don't know. But it 'looks' like an even number, nothing odd about it.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Neither, you can't divide 0 by 2 or any other number.
Do I win?

You can, but you get 0. Splitting nothing into 2 equal parts is still nothing.

Neither, you can't divide 0 by 2 or any other number.
Do I win?

You can divide zero by anything, it just equals zero. You can't divide numbers BY zero.

Actually you can, but you get infinity or negative infinity, depending on whether you're approaching 0 from the positive or negative side. That's what a hyperbola represents.

Spoiler: y=1/x

 

[4li3n]

It's a number, it's not an abstract representation of nothingness,

Numbers are an abstract representation of something... so is math actually...


The reason ppl are confused about the issue is that you can't split nothing in two in any physical sense.


Why is it that most people that have studied pure math can't seem to remember that in the real world those numbers actually do represent some physical entity or force? Which is why Achilles and the tortoise is a paradox, because the logic of the proof if fine, but a human can overtake a turtle in the real world.


0 is even because it fits the definition, but i do wonder, would it ever even come up in the real world?

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

I don't know. But it 'looks' like an even number, nothing odd about it.

At least a couple of people can have a bit of a humour in their post when talking about this.

 

[DaNick667]

better question, is 0 negative or positive? I like to think the left half is negative and the right is positive

 

[DaNick667]

Edit: Double Post

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

better question, is 0 negative or positive? I like to think the left half is negative and the right is positive

Read the second part of this post [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.288523.11422888].

 

[Loonyyy]

Zero is indeed a number and a mathematical concept, as are ALL numbers. You may divide zero by any number, integers, reals, imaginaries, or even COMPLEX (THE superset). By definition 0/n is 0. And, also, not due to mathematicians being lazy as I see one person posted as, think about it, say I have an infinitismally small number, then I split it in half. I now have two infinitismally small numbers. Now the limit as the small number I split in half tends to zero is clearly 0 (assuming someone has college maths) Lim x->0 (x/2)=0. Evaluating this limit is basically a rough definition of the dividend of zero. Finally, since there is no remainer when divided by 2, 0 is not odd and hence even. Also, saying that zero is the absence of a number is so fundamentally stupid it defies belief. Numbers (In basic terms) measure quantities, hence, if you have none of something that can have a value, which is a value and not a concept. Noone is clever saying: the Romans had no concept of zero: wrong, Quantum physics has no zero:wrong, and finally, 0/n is impossible. Please can we just get the people who don't understand these things to try to count out the inverse of the question, what is 2/0?

 

[ilikepie59]

It's even.
Even numbers follow the 2n pattern (where n is an integer)
Odd numbers follow the 2n+1 pattern

Therefore 0 is even.

 

[4li3n]

Actually you can, but you get infinity or negative infinity, depending on whether you're approaching 0 from the positive or negative side. That's what a hyperbola represents.

Spoiler: y=1/x

Ahem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_by_zero

So in normal algebra (and others) you can't...

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Actually you can, but you get infinity or negative infinity, depending on whether you're approaching 0 from the positive or negative side. That's what a hyperbola represents.

Spoiler: y=1/x

Ahem: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divide_by_zero

So in normal algebra (and others) you can't...

Ok, fine. But you can divide by numbers so infinitesimally small they basically are 0. That's why I said approaching 0. Has no one else in this thread done limits?

 

[Tzekelkan]

It's a number, it's not an abstract representation of nothingness,

Numbers are an abstract representation of something... so is math actually...

The reason ppl are confused about the issue is that you can't split nothing in two in any physical sense.

Why is it that most people that have studied pure math can't seem to remember that in the real world those numbers actually do represent some physical entity or force? Which is why Achilles and the tortoise is a paradox, because the logic of the proof if fine, but a human can overtake a turtle in the real world.

0 is even because it fits the definition, but i do wonder, would it ever even come up in the real world?

I know math is a tool. I'm not a Mathematician, I'm studying to become a Nuclear Engineer so I just use math. So I know mathematics are just abstract representations of 'real world' entities, but some people seem to be implying that zero is literally the manifestation of a Nietzschean void into which God himself stares impotently.

I agree that it represents 'nothing' in the 'real world', if you really want it to. I agree that when a quantum eigenvalue is zero, the associated eigen-state is unoccupied and therefore presents no physical interest. I agree that zero is nothing.

But that does not exclude it from being a number. A number that is even.

 

[4li3n]

Ok, fine. But you can divide by numbers so infinitesimally small they basically are 0. That's why I said approaching 0. Has no one else in this thread done limits?

Well i only read until after the Content part of the wiki article, but it seemed to me that it covers that too...

I know math is a tool. I'm not a Mathematician, I'm studying to become a Nuclear Engineer so I just use math. So I know mathematics are just abstract representations of 'real world' entities, but some people seem to be implying that zero is literally the manifestation of a Nietzschean void into which God himself stares impotently.

I agree that it represents 'nothing' in the 'real world', if you really want it to. I agree that when a quantum eigenvalue is zero, the associated eigen-state is unoccupied and therefore presents no physical interest. I agree that zero is nothing.

Somehow i doubt Nietzschean void is what goes through the minds of ppl who can't seem to understand that by definition 0 is even, no matter what 0 represents in a real world sense. The concept of splitting no oranges in two is as far as it goes probably.

But that does not exclude it from being a number. A number that is even.

Pretty sure i made it clear that numbers being abstract concepts in the first place means even the representation of a Nietzschean void counts as a number right in the beginning of the post you quoted.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Ok, fine. But you can divide by numbers so infinitesimally small they basically are 0. That's why I said approaching 0. Has no one else in this thread done limits?

Well i only read until after the Content part of the wiki article, but it seemed to me that it covers that too...

I'll put it another way. What's 1/0.1? 10. What's 1/0.0000001? 10000000. So from there we can see that as our denominator gets closer and closer to 0, our answer gets bigger and bigger. So if we have 1 divided by an infinite number of 0's after the decimal point with a 1 at the end we can conclude that our answer will be 1 followed by an infinite number of 0's, giving us infinity.

 

[dantoddd]

I agree that zero is nothing.

not true. It depends on how you look at things.

Zero is the additive identity in the field of real numbers most scientists/engineers do work in.
Zero however, is also the empty set, meaning nothing, in natural numbers.

 

[4li3n]

Ok, fine. But you can divide by numbers so infinitesimally small they basically are 0. That's why I said approaching 0. Has no one else in this thread done limits?

Well i only read until after the Content part of the wiki article, but it seemed to me that it covers that too...

I'll put it another way. What's 1/0.1? 10. What's 1/0.0000001? 10000000. So from there we can see that as our denominator gets closer and closer to 0, our answer gets bigger and bigger. So if we have 1 divided by an infinite number of 0's after the decimal point with a 1 at the end we can conclude that our answer will be 1 followed by an infinite number of 0's, giving us infinity.

No, i meant that it does show that near 0 numbers make it work... but that's a bit of a cheat, innit.

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

Ok, fine. But you can divide by numbers so infinitesimally small they basically are 0. That's why I said approaching 0. Has no one else in this thread done limits?

Well i only read until after the Content part of the wiki article, but it seemed to me that it covers that too...

I'll put it another way. What's 1/0.1? 10. What's 1/0.0000001? 10000000. So from there we can see that as our denominator gets closer and closer to 0, our answer gets bigger and bigger. So if we have 1 divided by an infinite number of 0's after the decimal point with a 1 at the end we can conclude that our answer will be 1 followed by an infinite number of 0's, giving us infinity.

No, i meant that it does show that near 0 numbers make it work... but that's a bit of a cheat, innit.

Maths is all about cheating.

 

[4li3n]

I agree that zero is nothing.

not true. It depends on how you look at things.

Zero is the additive identity in the field of real numbers most scientists/engineers do work in.
Zero however, is also the empty set, meaning nothing, in natural numbers.

Yeah, but those that aren't really nothing aren't really zero, even if they might as well be... (kinda like 0.999... might as well be 1 because you will never get to the difference because it would take an infinite amount of time, but an apple is still 1 and not 0.999...).