No such thing as 0

[Dr Jekyll]

Who invented negative numbers?

[Cold]

Dr Jekyll said:

Who invented negative numbers?

Neil from the Young Ones.

[fouronthefloor]

I would agree that zero is nothing therefore it doesn't exist.
In the same way that any other number doesn't exist.
Numbers were created in the mind of humans. They are made up.

[4x4Tyke]

Dr Jekyll said:

Who invented negative numbers?

They've been known since ancient times, but were not accepted as legitimate until Descartes and later Leibniz.

[SantaBarbara]

The Spruce goose said:

All the energy is the universe is zero. We are something, but all positive energy is cancelled by negative energy.

Can you prove that, please?

[Einion Yrth]

Hilts said:

I think you'll have trouble with ?(?1) !

i factorial is certainly one of those hmmmm, numbers; give me a while...


Peter Elliott, UCLA Applied Math '13; CMU Statistics PhD Student
Answered Apr 6, 2014 · Upvoted by David Joyce, Ph.D. Mathematics, University of Pennsylvania (1979) and Anurag Bishnoi, Ph.D. Mathematics, Ghent University (2016)
The factorial function technically isn't defined for non-natural numbers, but it is usually extended to complex numbers using the gamma function: Γ(n)=(n−1)!Γ(n)=(n−1)!.

In this case we have n−1=in−1=i, so in some sense i!=Γ(i+1)i!=Γ(i+1).

According to Wolfram Alpha this is:

You can't really interpret this in the way you would normally interpret factorial though.

[768]

AndStilliRise said:

All I am saying is that 0 is not nothing. 0 is something. It may be less than 1 but it is more than nothing.

It's semantically more than nothing, but not numerically.

[FredClogs]

Hilts said:

I think you'll have trouble with ?(?1) !

Use you imagination why don't you.

[rxtx]

Einion Yrth said:

Compiled in debug mode, It's a visual studio thing rather than GCC and the like, has meta-data that allows symbolic debugging (something which GCC etc, will also do) also has a startup stub that fills the heap with recognisable and constant data. HTH.

That makes even less sense. Why would you fill a heap with incorrect data, and why do you represent NULL as a value? You don't compile in "debug mode", you add debug symbols, it doesn't matter what platform/language you're using.

[Hilts]

FredClogs said:

Hilts said:

I think you'll have trouble with √(−1) !

Use you imagination why don't you.

Imagination, could make a man of you.

[AW111]

rxtx said:

Einion Yrth said:

Compiled in debug mode, It's a visual studio thing rather than GCC and the like, has meta-data that allows symbolic debugging (something which GCC etc, will also do) also has a startup stub that fills the heap with recognisable and constant data. HTH.

That makes even less sense. Why would you fill a heap with incorrect data, and why do you represent NULL as a value? You don't compile in "debug mode", you add debug symbols, it doesn't matter what platform/language you're using.

It makes perfect sense. In debug mode, memory is initialised to a known non-zero value at start up. This means that any variable/memory that you use before assigning will have that value.

[scorp]

Einion Yrth said:

In debug code it's usually 0x0c0c0c0c;, oddly when programmers at our shop don't guard properly I'm seeing 0x000000018
I have no idea why.

0x00000018 is probably someone doing "pointer->someMember" were member is at 0x18 bytes offset and pointer = null (=0).

AW111 said:

It makes perfect sense. In debug mode, memory is initialised to a known non-zero value at start up. This means that any variable/memory that you use before assigning will have that value.

If you get a seg fault at or around "0xdddddddd" you know this very likely came from memory that was previously in use but already freed, as the debug-mode libraries are using modified free()/malloc() calls to initialise memory to easy to spot values. Dangling pointer bugs can be a nightmare if it is accessing old but valid data.

Edited by scorp on Monday 16th October 04:56

[scorp]

fouronthefloor said:

I would agree that zero is nothing therefore it doesn't exist.
In the same way that any other number doesn't exist.
Numbers were created in the mind of humans. They are made up.

How about if we are comparing the difference between two things, like two peoples height or something, everyone can grasp "no difference" ?

[K12beano]

scorp said:

fouronthefloor said:

I would agree that zero is nothing therefore it doesn't exist.
In the same way that any other number doesn't exist.
Numbers were created in the mind of humans. They are made up.

How about if we are comparing the difference between two things, like two peoples height or something, everyone can grasp "no difference" ?

But numbers don’t exist. The difference between two things that don’t exist? Are you say that is something that exists?

[Gary C]

SantaBarbara said:

The Spruce goose said:

All the energy is the universe is zero. We are something, but all positive energy is cancelled by negative energy.

Can you prove that, please?

Doesent current theory infact suggest that there was/is an imbalance in our universe.

Have a look at baryon matter-antimatter asymmetry

Edited by Gary C on Monday 16th October 08:21

[anonymous-user]

Hilts said:

FredClogs said:

Hilts said:

I think you'll have trouble with ?(?1) !

Use you imagination why don't you.

Imagination, could make a man of you.

That's some smart response.

[Hilts]

Greg66 said:

Hilts said:

FredClogs said:

Hilts said:

I think you'll have trouble with √(−1) !

Use you imagination why don't you.

Imagination, could make a man of you.

That's some smart response.

Only for some people.

[Johnnytheboy]

2gins said:

Come off it OP you mad bd, even bees believe in 0.

Will post link when sober but you can find it, not that long ago BBC I think

We will be able to tell when you are sober when your username changes to "0gins" I assume?

[RTB]

SantaBarbara said:

The Spruce goose said:

All the energy is the universe is zero. We are something, but all positive energy is cancelled by negative energy.

Can you prove that, please?

The positive energy of an objects mass is effectively cancelled out by the negative energy of it's gravitational field (providing the Universe is flat)


You can think of zero as a place holder and since it is holding a place it could be considered a something rather than a nothing.....

[AndStilliRise]

RTB said:

SantaBarbara said:

The Spruce goose said:

All the energy is the universe is zero. We are something, but all positive energy is cancelled by negative energy.

Can you prove that, please?

The positive energy of an objects mass is effectively cancelled out by the negative energy of it's gravitational field (providing the Universe is flat)


You can think of zero as a place holder and since it is holding a place it could be considered a something rather than a nothing.....

Exactly my point. It is a placeholder for numerical means.