You know what's in error? (shattering a certian paradox)

[Sign Related]

Including 0 (zero) in:

counting in general
time
days of the month
years
calulations
ages

It is amazing how far and deep this ultimate error went. And it sure got the human race defined as retarted or under some on-going retardation.

If you're going to include "0" then that means you have to start with the very "0" before the "1" in general. And we all honestly can tell that dont go right, and that people have been leaving off the "0" before the "1" just to suit whatever it be.

Hold your hands up!

There cant be 10 fingers there by an actual fact. You either have to count the first finger as "0" on one of your hands. That would make one hand 0-4 and the other hand 5-9.

^^^And that reveals the error and reveals the error is only corrected when you loose "0" in general (Drop the 0, 10, 20, etc; 100, 110, etc; 1000, 1001, 1110, etc--You get the drift--Along with the label names of them)

The definition, to say, 11, should be: Greater than 9, but lesser than 12. On my hand there is 11 fingers in fact, not 10 since we knowing dont count the "0" before the "1"--and even if we did count the "0" before the "1" there still can not be 10 fingers.

Calulations... 5 TIMES 2 (for example) should equal 11 (defined as greater than 9, but lesser than 12).

The world is so in error we must reset a lot.

On a clock... Instead of 1:00 am (which is obviouly not even 1 'O clock because there are two Os) it should be 1:1 am. That's right, not 1:01 am, 1:1 am. You can guess what the rest should be concerning time on a watch or on a clock. The only honest thing shaped as an "O" is the shape of the round clock itself, because acually "0" (zero) has an oval shape.

In a month... We obviously dont go it's March 0...No, we go it's March 1st... So then, again, there shouldnt be a "0" in any bit of any mouth.

"0" shows no means or no value.

In age... It is still in error even though the "0" is counted because of the rest I just went over. When a baby comes just out of their mother are they in "0" hours (though we know there is an hour upon?), "0" months (though we know a mouth is upon?), and "0" years (though we know a year is upon?)? I tell you, they are of that hour (which is valued as an hour) and of that mouth (which is valued as a month) and of that year (which is valued as a year). For they are of the earth.

No need to go back in time an correct from there, but we can correct the error henceforth when we want from now. Right now it's such a dark era of error we under. How can we correct the year without going back in time? It's simple, just state it's 2115 instead of 2005 and go from there. And some time right then some of us literally will have left the dark ages. Correcting the error where you stand puts you a century ahead. You'd look back and say it was the smartest move.

And dont forget to add states on the list. There isnt a single state counted as "0" (0st? 0th?) so there cant be a 10th, 20th, 30th, 40th, or 50th state.

The U.S. is 51 states in fact.

[Sign Related]

On a gospel side note:

Matthew 24:
51 (that 51 states correlation symbolizing us)And shall cut him asunder, and appoint him his portion with the hypocrites: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Cut up "0" for that and fill it in with numbers of value (a straight gnashing move on the error that is stranger) and then cut up the world of the devil in general, supernaturally, as the 'we secret truth' side cut apart, and yet, still be together.

[Hikaru Zero]

0 is not a number.

It is the absence of quantity.

Just like darkness is the absence of light,
And evil is the absence of good (or as some people claim).

And I assure you, that if you chop off my hands, I will not have "-1" fingers (that being one less than 0 fingers, which by your calculations, is nothing more than a pointer finger).

By the way, we only have 8 fingers anyway, not 10. ;)

[Professor Jumbo]

Gee Sign related, you're getting sloppy. You didn't mention Tupac even once in that whole thing.:) And speaking of Tupac, without zero would he turn into Onepac? or Threepac? :p

Seriously though assuming that there is no such thing as zero, as you claim, how many live dinosaurs do you own?

OOh and another thing, hey Hikaru Zero, looks like you're going to have to change your name to "Hikaru One", or maybe "Hikaru Negative One":D

[Defence_mechanism]

i was gonna reply but realised hikaru zero got it perfectly. sorry mate, zero is a concept. you're taking it too literally. we don't count with "0", unless there is nothing to count.

it's actually quite an intellectual and philosophical step to include "zero" in our numeric system. imagine a numeric system without it. we have realised that there can be an infinite amount of numbers, but in opposition to that, we have also noticed that there can be a complete absence of numbers - "zero". we dont count the first digit with a "0" because there is not an absence of digits. therefore, we do indeed have 10 digits on our hands. or 8 fingers if you will :P

[BlackBillBlake]

Including 0 (zero) in:

counting in general
time
days of the month
years
calulations
ages

.
Numbers are only signs. Without zero, the decimal system of numerals would simply not work.
In Jesus time, about the most advanced system of representation was Roman Numerals, which are extremely cumbersome, esp. where detailed or long calculations are concerned (which explains partly why the Romans didn't develop mathematics very far).
But further - it is simply ridiculous to say we could do without zero or its equivalent. If I have three fishes, and eat all three, I have none left - zero.
If I spend all my money, I have zero money.

[Kharakov]

If I spend all my money, I have zero money.
No you don't. You just think you have zero money. You actually don't have zero money. :p

[BlackBillBlake]

No you don't. You just think you have zero money. You actually don't have zero money. :p
Lol.

If I have no money
I have no money.

If you ask 'how much is in your account'? I could reply zero. It wouldn't have the ring of good english about it, but it would be true. (that is hypothetically, as I do have a small amount in there);)

But you're right - obviously you can't 'have' zero of a thing.

[Becknudefck]

if you had 10 fingers youd start counting with one. cause if you started with 0, youd still have the same 10 fingers.

[Colours]

the idea of zero, by itself, is not the same as the 0 in 20. i think its just a coincidence that zero and 0 have the same symbol. youre speaking of the picture (1,2, etc) that we put in front of data. but in reality, there are 10 fingures. Maybe all 0's in numbers should be replaced by smiley faces or soemthing.

[Duck]

the idea of zero, by itself, is not the same as the 0 in 20. i think its just a coincidence that zero and 0 have the same symbol. youre speaking of the picture (1,2, etc) that we put in front of data. but in reality, there are 10 fingures. Maybe all 0's in numbers should be replaced by smiley faces or soemthing.
not true
We count in a system that is best described as columns. In the number 20, 2 is the number in the tens column and there is nothing in the ones column

[Colours]

but say you have twenty apples. its not like you have twenty apples and zero apples. you have 20 apples, the 0 could be replaced by any symbol.

[Colours]

you brought up the number columns, and now i dont know how to fit it into what i was thinking. i left the subject for a while and forgot what i was talking about. ;)

[BlackBillBlake]

but say you have twenty apples. its not like you have twenty apples and zero apples. you have 20 apples, the 0 could be replaced by any symbol.
You have 2 x 10 apples. Two tens, no units - Primary school stuff.

[Hikaru Zero]

If you have 100 apples, that is not the same as saying that you have one times one hundred apples, with no tens of apples and no single apples.

Okay, it is the same. But ... just keep in mind, the fact that we use zeroes in our math at all is only because we are based off of a decimal system. I'm sure there are languages out there which have a character for every number (say, up until a thousand). I think the Chinese system is similar to that.

[Kharakov]

If you borrow $0.00 from a loan shark who charges a vig of $50.00 a day plus 33% interest compounded daily you are gonna see that $0.00 adds up quickly.

[Sign Related]

One example for those who disagree with my correction logic:

Lets say you bought yourself 1 gun at exactly 4:11 pm (based on a watch)...

Now as soon as you purchased it some thief took it from you with his bare hands lol...

Anyway, the time was still 4:11 pm (based on a watch) because that's how quick the theif took your gun away...

Now, according to your logic (of you who disagree with my correction), you'd explain to the cops that there was no hour in which the thief took it. So if they ask you in what hour the gun was stolen from you, according to your logic, you wouldnt say 4:11 pm (based on a watch) because in your logic you didnt have the gun for an hour yet.

(**Like you cant try to choose when it's only pleasing for you to step outside the paradox concerning an imaginative zero...and like say...4:11 pm was when the gun was stolen from you to the cops. I mean, since you obviously disagree with the baby scenario in my original post too. Or else, you'd be admitting you're being a hypocritical.)

As for the fact that you even purchased the 1 gun means that now, with it stolen, you're down at having a -1 gun account materialized and on your mind (negative effect alright. Or else, you wouldnt even bother reporting it to the cops if it wasnt something counted as a negative). Remember, you cant say to the cops, when they ask whose gun is stolen, that you own no gun or that you own "0" (zero) guns, when in fact, you have the 'proof of purchase' and the gun got stolen from you. For if that were possible, that you own no gun or that you own 0 (zero) guns, just because one got stolen from you, you'd be wasting the cops time, now wouldnt you? And there'd be no criminal or a 0 (zero) number of criminals to press charges against, wouldnt it? Or better yet, you'd be lieing to a police officers, wouldnt you?

[steffan]

10 is 10 is 10 no mater what designation you give it

[Sign Related]

One more example:

If someone stole a one dollar bill from me, it's still my one dollar bill! And the fact that some thief got it will in no wise make:

1. the fact change concerning it being my one dollar bill. It's just now a stolen (stolen implies the negative -) one dollar bill of mine.

2. me think (or even imply toward anyone else) I 'have' no stolen one dollar bill, as if I had a non-existant one dollar bill stolen from me with "0" zero value/worth from the get-go. Nope, that's imaginary. I'd just 'have' a stolen(-) one dollar bill as an actual fact.


I'd be one punk'd negro if someone stole my one dollar bill, and I just act like it has no value from the get-go just because it got stolen unto some thief's hands, and that I dont simply go, "Damn! I've just been robbed of one dollar bill! Somebody, call 911!" with some common sense. lol. I mean, there sure wouldnt be a neutral (zero--if neutral is defined as zero by you) reaction to something like that, now would there? No, there would indeed be a negative one coming from me in my right mind.

But if you are someone not in your right mind, say, because of a religion that brainwashed you into some 'turn the other cheak' motto or 'forgive and let go' motto, then you would have what kind of reaction? A neutral (zero--if neutral is defind as zero by you) "one" or a possitive "one"? Ha! It would be in fact a (one) reaction nonetheless! Now that's a whole other explaining of the paradox, isnt it, which just goes to reveal the error concerning 0 (zero) in counting in general?

By the way, neutral is as favoring -1 or 1 or 'either side', and not 0. For if you put a car in neutral on a hill, you know neutral wont cancel out (as in, not favor either side as a fact) the down roll of the car, as in, keep the car remaining still on a hill. The definition of "neutral" in a dictionary is in error of one faulty human imagination.

[Kharakov]

So what if I use a 3 dollar bill at a chinese grocery in san fran. They go to the back and try to give the bill to them. The bank says "So sorry, money no blinky". So they have a 3 dollar bill that is worth no dollars. They keep the three dollar bill that is worth 0 dollars in a picture frame behind the counter that everyone sees when they walk in, with the caption 3 dollah sucky sucky underneath it.

So the lesson is that even if your $3.00 bill is worth $0.00, it still has intrinsic value in a joke.

[Colours]

whats to think about? someones steals your dollar and its gone and youre mad. end of story. and can you even imagine what would have to be done with every computer in every company everywhere in the world. the world is practically made up of 01 computer code.

[Sign Related]

whats to think about? someones steals your dollar and its gone and youre mad. end of story. and can you even imagine what would have to be done with every computer in every company everywhere in the world. the world is practically made up of 01 computer code.
^^^The Reseting, let's call it, which compasses more than just computer code (yes, on down to measurment in general), will have caused more work to be done which equals more paying jobs on a possitive note. The human race will have benifited. And it will have made the human race one bright human race. Beisdes, who then will have wanted to see the human race not advance?

People sure have such faith in an error. The biggest, and most seductive, religion on earth, the human race followed after, is 0 (zero)--a non-existant zero. I tell you, there be people that praise 0 (zero), though it dont exist and never existed, except could have in one's imagination only.

[Sign Related]

After taking photos...

The photos are on a roll and are considered the negative (-) prints, not considered the neutral (zero--if neutral is defined as zero by you) prints.

Then, once the negative (-) prints are delevolped: here comes all the positive prints made from 'em, rather than, 'here comes all the netrual (zero--if neutral is defined as zero by you) prints made from 'em.


^^^There never is a point in time where the photos, on the prints, are considered 0 (zero).

And I tell you, if blank film is considered neutral, as defined by a dictionary, then that blank film would be stuck blank no matter if you tried to take a picture on it. While at the same time, since netrual defined by a dictionary is: "not favoring either", besides the blank film not taking a picture to begin with, the film could have never existed in the first place either because "neutral", as defined by a dictionary, would imply that you never at any time even see(n) the blank film!

As for the number chart... Corrected it's:

-etc. -2 -1 1 2 etc.

And -1 + 1 equals -1 + 1 as the final answer.

[Colours]

so then people will never starve, cause there will never be 0 food supply.

[Sign Related]

so then people will never starve, cause there will never be 0 food supply.Ha, to be specific: Can not your body eat of itself from within?

So there is no 0 (zero) food even in starvation.

Even the earth (which every body is of), in general, reveals that it eats, so to speak, itself and brings forth fruit, so to speak, undeniablely one in the same.

^^^And that's of an on-going cycle.

[Colours]

no, your body cannot eat itself, unless you have cancer.

[Sign Related]

^^^If that were true, that your body of the earth can not eat itself, then if I were to go dig up one casket buried back in 1911, there should be one full fleshed healthy looking body there.

Let's say your weight is 199 pounds from eating three meals a day...

Ok, if you started to eat, say, one meal a day only henceforth after that weighing of yourself, instead of, say, a basic serving of three meals a day as you would have once did, you would surely not stay 199 pounds, say, at the end of 2 weeks. Your body from within would have eaten some of itself along with that one meal a day. And you know, as your body eats, your body produces waste (by-products) from a process.

^^^Would you like to tell me how your body would remain 199 pounds from that? What? You'd step on the weighing machine with weights from a gym? Or you'd just imagine that your body remained 199 pounds because you simply can imagine?

[Colours]

you cannot feast on your own waste matter. bacteria eat away at your body, but this doesnt fill your stomach.

[Sign Related]

you cannot feast on your own waste matter. bacteria eat away at your body, but this doesnt fill your stomach.Food consumed turns into waste. You're not answering how you'd remain 199 pounds?

When you starve your body is breaking down itself as food for itself (that is considered eating itself). And that food consumed, no matter which way in the process, turns into waste. But the waste can be used by plants.

Look at your finger... did it not consume anything to be a healthy finger? And if you starve does not your finger also start whithering because of a 'consuming and wasting' process?

I tell you, 'eating and wasting' goes deep. You're blind if you think not that your entire body eats (consumes) and procudes waste to purge, one way or another. Have you not lost your baby teeth, hair, and skin yet? When you shower, does not the whithered skin, rendered as a by-product, shead on off of your body?

[Colours]

when youre starving, youre starving. you lose fat adn eventually muscle, but youll still be hungry. face it zero exists!! how many elephants do you have sitting next to you now--zero!

[Sign Related]

when youre starving, youre starving. you lose fat adn eventually muscle, but youll still be hungry. face it zero exists!! how many elephants do you have sitting next to you now--zero!You're hungry, but there is still food that your body is consuming.

Next to me? 'Next to me' includes from any distance around me. So I have all the elephants that are sitting, as we speak, next to me.

Is not what's significally defined as the sun next to what is significanly defined as the planet Mercury, even though there is a great significant defined distance between them?

[Sign Related]

And if you were to be specific in the distance...like were to ask me how many elephants I have next to me within one foot... I'd simply tell you, negative elephants I have next to me within one foot. I still know better than to say 0 (zero) since you used the term 'have'. Who can 'have' nothingness when nothingness doesn't exist?

[Hikaru Zero]

And if you were to be specific in the distance...like were to ask me how many elephants I have next to me within one foot... I'd simply tell you, negative elephants I have next to me within one foot. I still know better than to say 0 (zero) since you used the term 'have'. Who can 'have' nothingness when nothingness doesn't exist?

Zero is not null. As a programmer, I understand this concept EXTREMELY well.

In programming, "nothingness" is called null. In programming, a number can be represented as a definate number (called a "literal"). It can also be represented as an indefinite number, which is called "undefined" or "undef" for short. In addition, there is also something known as "null" which means, there is no value whatsoever. If there IS a value, but we don't know what it is, then it's "undefined." If there just plain isn't a value at all, then it's called "null."

And while you can't have "nothingness," you CAN have "nothing." (Nothing = 0, in this case).

===

Ultimately, you're just labelling your numbers differently, that's all. You're not actually talking about the concepts.

See, you are saying that 0 is actually the first number. So, your "zero" has the same value as what the rest of us call "one." And your "one" will have the same value as our "two." And so on.

But what you DON'T have a value for is our "zero." Instead, you are saying that our "zero" is equal to "undefined." Your numbering system has no way to quantify the amount of elephants that are sitting in your immediate vicinity. Instead, you are leaving it unquantified, which is "undefined."

The problem is, there is a DEFINITE value for how many elephants there are near you. That definite number, on a graph, would lie directly between "-1" and "1." And it would be a quantity that is less than all positive real numbers, and more than all negative real numbers, and it would not be either positive or negative.

With your thinking, you cannot answer the question "what is 1 minus 1?" with a definite answer. And under your thinking, doing any kind of financial work or a simple matter of balancing the checkbook would be impossible.

[Sign Related]

^^^Actually, 1 minus 1 is -1 in the correction. But in the error of seductive human imagination gone wild, 1 minus 1 = that non-existant 0 (zero).

If there were two elephants sitting within a one mile distance of me, to previous question I answered, I'd still say within one foot negative elephants sitting I have next to me. How come that instead of saying, "Within one foot -2 elephants sitting I have next to me?" Simply because I would have had to have had two elephants sitting within one foot of me at first that then became moved to be sitting one mile away, and the question would have had to have been rather:

Say you "have" two elephants sitting within one foot of you "now", then those two elephants sitting you have within one foot of you are removed to be sitting one mile away from you...Within one foot of you "now", how many elephants sitting do you have next to you?

^^^Ans: Within one foot of me "now" -2 elephants sitting I "have" next to me.

Words have an important role in the overall figuring.

On how many... by just saying "...negative elephants sitting I have next to me." implies just however many that be. The same is true in speaking in general even so because the question to me never stated at what specific time to count elephants sitting. I mean, for all I know, just before I even write in the period after the answer to finalize it another elephant could have just sat down. So ha!

[Peace]

Including 0 (zero) in:

counting in general
time
days of the month
years
calulations
ages

It is amazing how far and deep this ultimate error went. And it sure got the human race defined as retarted or under some on-going retardation.

If you're going to include "0" then that means you have to start with the very "0" before the "1" in general. And we all honestly can tell that dont go right, and that people have been leaving off the "0" before the "1" just to suit whatever it be.

Hold your hands up!

There cant be 10 fingers there by an actual fact. You either have to count the first finger as "0" on one of your hands. That would make one hand 0-4 and the other hand 5-9.

^^^And that reveals the error and reveals the error is only corrected when you loose "0" in general (Drop the 0, 10, 20, etc; 100, 110, etc; 1000, 1001, 1110, etc--You get the drift--Along with the label names of them)

The definition, to say, 11, should be: Greater than 9, but lesser than 12. On my hand there is 11 fingers in fact, not 10 since we knowing dont count the "0" before the "1"--and even if we did count the "0" before the "1" there still can not be 10 fingers.

Calulations... 5 TIMES 2 (for example) should equal 11 (defined as greater than 9, but lesser than 12).

The world is so in error we must reset a lot.

On a clock... Instead of 1:00 am (which is obviouly not even 1 'O clock because there are two Os) it should be 1:1 am. That's right, not 1:01 am, 1:1 am. You can guess what the rest should be concerning time on a watch or on a clock. The only honest thing shaped as an "O" is the shape of the round clock itself, because acually "0" (zero) has an oval shape.

In a month... We obviously dont go it's March 0...No, we go it's March 1st... So then, again, there shouldnt be a "0" in any bit of any mouth.

"0" shows no means or no value.

In age... It is still in error even though the "0" is counted because of the rest I just went over. When a baby comes just out of their mother are they in "0" hours (though we know there is an hour upon?), "0" months (though we know a mouth is upon?), and "0" years (though we know a year is upon?)? I tell you, they are of that hour (which is valued as an hour) and of that mouth (which is valued as a month) and of that year (which is valued as a year). For they are of the earth.

No need to go back in time an correct from there, but we can correct the error henceforth when we want from now. Right now it's such a dark era of error we under. How can we correct the year without going back in time? It's simple, just state it's 2115 instead of 2005 and go from there. And some time right then some of us literally will have left the dark ages. Correcting the error where you stand puts you a century ahead. You'd look back and say it was the smartest move.

And dont forget to add states on the list. There isnt a single state counted as "0" (0st? 0th?) so there cant be a 10th, 20th, 30th, 40th, or 50th state.

The U.S. is 51 states in fact.
0 would actually be the absense of a number. You hold no fingers up, how may are you holding up? 0. It acts as the median between positive and negative numbers. You want it simpler? Okay. Negative infinity (representing negative numbers) added to positive infinity (repsresenting positive numbers) equals your median, 0.

[Hikaru Zero]

0 would actually be the absense of a number. You hold no fingers up, how may are you holding up? 0. It acts as the median between positive and negative numbers. You want it simpler? Okay. Negative infinity (representing negative numbers) added to positive infinity (repsresenting positive numbers) equals your median, 0.

I think I actually said that in a previous post. =P

0 is a defined number that represents a complete lack of quanta within the scope of numbers (as opposed to non-existance of quanta entirely within the scope, which would be "null," since numbers can have quanta but nothingness/null can't ever have quanta).

[Peace]

I think I actually said that in a previous post. =P

0 is a defined number that represents a complete lack of quanta within the scope of numbers (as opposed to non-existance of quanta entirely within the scope, which would be "null," since numbers can have quanta but nothingness/null can't ever have quanta).
I only read the first post so sorry if you said that in the previous post.

[Kharakov]

So Sign related-

How's the square root of -1 work into your number system?

i i i i, dunnu dunnu dunnu dunnu, All abooooarrrd!!

[Peace]

So Sign related-

How's the square root of -1 work into your number system?

i i i i, dunnu dunnu dunnu dunnu, All abooooarrrd!!
the square root of -1 is an imaginary number (i). i² = -1. Simple alegbra.

[Colours]

mm algebra 2

[Kharakov]

the square root of -1 is an imaginary number (i). i² = -1. Simple alegbra.
Yeah. The question was aimed at Sign Related. I was wondering how (i) fits into his number system without zeros.

Like, is there a square root of -1 if there are no 0's?

[Colours]

no, because then we'd have to count i 0 1 2 3 ;)