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

[NeutralDrow]

Erm numbers are not abstract? They are the opposite! Numbers are universal! Numbers are logical! What the hell do you mean they are abstract?! Zero is a concept. Numbers are not just a concept they are a universal law.

Abstraction and logic aren't mutually exclusive. Logic itself is an abstract concept.

Numbers themselves are conceptual, quantity is concrete. Not all numbers are quantitative (especially certain universal numbers, like i, or the gravitational constant, or Planck's constant). Hell, what you're really arguing is that negative numbers don't exist.

Zero is nothing. It is no put into a sequence of numbers. Count 0 ducks for me. You didnt do any counting. Zero isnt a number

I just did. You argue that I didn't do any counting, but instead I just counted nothing. Because I counted nothing, I came to the conclusion that there are no (or "zero") ducks in my immediate vicinity. Counting works with any whole number (a sequence in which zero is included).

 

[hurfdurp]

Since I've known zero, he's always been a number to me.

 

[Sylveria]

The OP is.. retarded.. please retake first grade math and stop trying to by a philosophical asshole.

 

[Hawgh]

Since I've known zero, he's always been a number to me.

But has he ever been...a father?

 

[SuperCombustion]

Zero is the implication of nothing, or the absence of everything. It is a state, not a number. A number is representation of value, zero is a symbol to aid in comprehension of nothing.
Zero is'nt a number, it is a symbol to represent nothingness.

... also, if you divide by it, you implode the multiverse...

 

[hurfdurp]

Since I've known zero, he's always been a number to me.

But has he ever been...a father?

That one time he was on Maury, yes.

 

[LitleWaffle]

I don't think it is. It is merely a place holder for something that isn't there.
You have 0 apples, which means nothings there.

 

[neilsaccount]

uhm.....you got too much time on your hands and thinking too much, in a way you're just splitting hairs.
It's a number, stop messing around.

I agree, I understand the argument, but why the hell should i care? Just sayin, thats all.

 

[bad rider]

If aliens came to our planet the one thing we would have in common was the ability to count.

Bullshit. You can't guarantee aliens could count, that would be like me telling you god is a goldfish. Don't spout facts you can't prove please.

 

[PxDn Ninja]

Interesting theory, but as a software engineer I have to both disagree, and provide counterpoints

#include <math.h> // for isnan
#include <stdio.h> // for puts
int main(int, char**)
{
  // End thread if the value of fZero is a number
  float const fZero = 0.0f; // declare fZero as a const float and initialise it to zero
  if (! isnan(fZero)) // if fZero is not NaN...
  {
    // declare sEndThread as a ptr to const char and initialize it to string literal
    char const* sEndThread = "/thread";
    puts(sEndThread); // write "/thread\n" to stdout
  }
  return 0; // return from function, terminating program with exit status 0
}

Output:
/thread

Tst tsk, you forgot to comment, and surely you know hard coding is a bad practice. I fixed it for ya

Har har. Is that enough comments for you? Also: Hungarian notation, NOOOOO!

[small]I'm such a nerd...[/small]

Haha, I was going to take it further in my post and chose not to. I tip my hat to you sir, and approve this for check in to source control. Now just to keep an eye out for the QA bug to say 0.0 isn't a number lol.

 

[yoyo13rom]

Zero is nothing. It is no put into a sequence of numbers. Count 0 ducks for me. You didnt do any counting. Zero isnt a number

Ok so how would you like to do this maths problem?
Farmer Joe has 3 ducks and sells all of them. How many ducks does he have? None.
Ok how are you going to put that in a ecuation?
3-3=0
I mean are you going to write 3-3=none?(well you could, but it's a universal rule that it's easier to just write 0 instead of none).

I'm directing this at anyone who is having some deep debate around me.

This is a graph.

If zero isn't a number, then how is the following possible?

My George! Capitalism is really starting to mess with people brains.
Nah, just kidding. Every one has questions during their teen years. some are more goofy, some are more complex, the true problem is if you don't have any questions regarding life(then you'd be a mindless zombie).
I would like to lecture you on the topic(it's quite easy actually), but if you want a really philosophical and complex answer I recommend you read this

 

[Flying Dagger]

In 21 pages I assume someone is competent enough at debating to have pointed out that it all depends on your definition of what constitutes a "Number." Because I have no faith in humanity, I'll assume everyone else is an idiot and hasn't.
Google describes it as:

Definitions of number on the Web:

?the property possessed by a sum or total or indefinite quantity of units or individuals; "he had a number of chores to do"; "the number of parameters is small"; "the figure was about a thousand"
?a concept of quantity involving zero and units; "every number has a unique position in the sequence"
?act: a short theatrical performance that is part of a longer program; "he did his act three times every evening"; "she had a catchy little routine"; "it was one of the best numbers he ever did"
?phone number: the number is used in calling a particular telephone; "he has an unlisted number"
?numeral: a symbol used to represent a number; "he learned to write the numerals before he went to school"
?total: add up in number or quantity; "The bills amounted to $2,000"; "The bill came to $2,000"
?issue: one of a series published periodically; "she found an old issue of the magazine in her dentist's waiting room"
?give numbers to; "You should number the pages of the thesis"
?a select company of people; "I hope to become one of their number before I die"
?enumerate; "We must number the names of the great mathematicians"
?a numeral or string of numerals that is used for identification; "she refused to give them her Social Security number"
?count: put into a group; "The academy counts several Nobel Prize winners among its members"
?a clothing measurement; "a number 13 shoe"
?count: determine the number or amount of; "Can you count the books on your shelf?"; "Count your change"
?the grammatical category for the forms of nouns and pronouns and verbs that are used depending on the number of entities involved (singular or dual or plural); "in English the subject and the verb must agree in number"

You'll have to pick a definition, or make one up, before I can tell you why you are wrong. (Not that that will stop me trying)
I'm guessing that the gist of the argument was that zero was simply the absence of a number, and can therefore not be a number. This would seem to make sense. The absence of a house is not a house, and the absence of a car is not a car.

The problem arises when you realise that the definition of a number is the one I have selected in bold. A number, in the case of zero as you describe it, unless I have greatly misunderstood your post, is a measurement of quantity. The absence of this quantity is zero, but the fact of the definition being a measurement makes even the absence of a number, a number in itself.

Still, full marks for trying to think outside the box.

 

[WolfMage]

I move zero miles to work, and zero miles home. I have traveled zero miles.
Also, semantics are for idiots, and those who argue with them. Which are you?

 

[Coalhada]

Zero is a number. What you ask us to read in your post is just a bunch of mathematical misconceptions and logic traps. If you study a little bit of "college math", you'll see that any number is an abstraction.

P.S.: Your "great example that you came up with" is wrong. You use two different concepts of "distance" and switch between them. Try to look up relative vs absolute distance (basic physics).

 

[Unesh52]

Garblarg! I can't believe this thread has gone to over 700 posts! Can there be that much disagreement about such a basic thing? This just irritates the piss out of me. The OP is talking right out of his ass, as are half of the posters here! This is the most pointless, nonsensical, semantic bullshit I've ever seen! I just... GAH!

Yes! It's a number! As in, there are 0 reasons this thread is still hot. The existence of absolute "nothing" may be philosophically debatable, but the common concept of nothing is still a valid and useful one, so what the fuck are we talking about? I can say nothing else, just... please!

EDIT: 171 people on this thread are either phenomenal idiots or trolls. And another handful are either also idiots or have been misled by the more convincing idiots.

 

[yoyo13rom]

I don't get it - are you insulting, complimenting, disagreeing or agreeing with me?

Bryghtside is confused :?

Oops. Didn't mean to confuse you more.
So let's take it from the top:

I tried to insult/make a (bad) joke about capitalism(because I feel it makes people more materialistic than they should be), so here's nothing personal(you didn't invent it; it's just this concept I like to bash on)

Then I complemented you. It's really good to ask questions(only those who don't think at all don't ask themselves questions), no matter how complex or easy the answer is.

And then I disagreed with you(didn't mean to insult or offend you or anything, I just disagreed).

Zero is a number(well that's how I was taught). 0.2 is totally possible(and I can't see it as an argument).

Think it this way: 0 is the location HQ/home base on our TF2 map. The margin of a square is 1/10 a tenth of a kilometre, meaning 1 hectometre. The enemy base is 2 hectometres/ 0.2 kilometres to the north.

0.2 means just something really close(relatively considering your measuring unit) to 0(the origin).

Finally I recommended you that book, because it gives lodes of different perspectives on 0.(I didn't get to read all of it, but a friend of mine that's going to Oxford recommended it to me)

 

[oktalist]

approve this for check in to source control.

Now just to keep an eye out for the QA bug to say 0.0 isn't a number lol.

Well played.

 

[Blanko2]

Garblarg! I can't believe this thread has gone to over 700 posts! Can there be that much disagreement about such a basic thing? This just irritates the piss out of me. The OP is talking right out of his ass, as are half of the posters here! This is the most pointless, nonsensical, semantic bullshit I've ever seen! I just... GAH!

Yes! It's a number! As in, there are 0 reasons this thread is still hot. The existence of absolute "nothing" may be philosophically debatable, but the common concept of nothing is still a valid and useful one, so what the fuck are we talking about? I can say nothing else, just... please!

EDIT: 171 people on this thread are either phenomenal idiots or trolls. And another handful are either also idiots or have been misled by the more convincing idiots.

/agree
/agree so hard its a gorram agreement singularity being formed inside my brain, here.

 

[yoyo13rom]

Garblarg! I can't believe this thread has gone to over 700 posts! Can there be that much disagreement about such a basic thing?

Tee hee, I guess this is how wars started and people of different religions started to dislike each other. Tee hee.

I finally understand why some find maths so hard. Tee hee.
No point in hanging around here any more, got to go to bed.

 

[runnerbelow]

This is still going on? Don't you people have important shit to discuss instead? I've said this before...

WE'RE ARE NOT THE MOST BRILLIANT PEOPLE IN THE WORLD.

Do you really think that any of you who said it is not a number are genius enough to be the first person to recognize that if it we're completely true? If it was, WE PROBABLY WOULD NOT EVEN KNOW OF ZERO'S EXISTENCE AS A NUMBER BY DEFINITION TODAY, MORE THAN 2000 YEARS AFTER IT'S CREATION.

Now I feel bad. It's true that it is not by a certain definition of number... But you know what? It is considered a number BY MORE DEFINITIONS THAN IT IS NOT.

Can we please get over this?