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

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.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

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"

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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

 

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

 

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 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.

 

You have 2 x 10 apples. Two tens, no units - Primary school stuff.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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?

 

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

 

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.

 

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.