Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
New Visitors to sci.math: Zero is NOT a number.
43 views
Skip to first unread message
Eram semper recta
Oct 16, 2021, 2:10:51 AM10/16/21
to
Some idiot called Mridula Verma made the following comment on one of my videos:
"Also when we multiply f(x) by x/x , we are not imagining , multiplying by 1 , we multiply by a function x/x . "
Nonsense. x/x is a number. Any expression must evaluate to a number because if it does not, then you are no longer dealing with mathematics (which is the science of measure and number), but something else.
x/x is not a function. f(x) = x/x is a function and it is *exactly* equivalent to f(x)=1 for IF x/x is not 1, then it can't be anything else but gibberish.
In order to be part of an arithmetical expression, the measure of a magnitude must be a well-formed number (Because ... A number is a name given to a measure of a magnitude or size). For example x/x implies that x is a number. Fools in mainstream math academia love to fool themselves into believing that 0 is a number and that 0/0 is meaningless. In fact, they need 0 to be a number so that they can punch holes in functions, for otherwise 𝛿 > 0 and ε > 0 are not possible and their hand waving calculus fails even more dismally than just being circular. So on the one hand they will say 0/0 is not allowed, but then claim that 0 is a number.
Only problem is that arithmetic operations (which are transferred from geometry) require *magnitudes* for both operands, whereas 0 cannot be an operand for any of the arithmetic operations simply because 0 is NOT a magnitude. To wit, 0 in addition and subtraction is a NON-OPERATION. In multiplication it is an "acceptable kludge" to the Church Of Academia orangutans since multiply any equation such as 3x = 6 by 0 results in 0 = 0, meaning the equation is destroyed. Therefore even multiplication by 0 fails.
Multiplication actually fails in general for any non-magnitude because it is derived from division, ie, p/q x r/s = pr/qs IF AND ONLY IF, p/q -:- s/r AND r/s -:- q/p are possible. ZERO is not a number! It is a useful place holder and disambiguation in communicating number without a radix template. Nothing else.
"Also when we multiply f(x) by x/x , we are not imagining , multiplying by 1 , we multiply by a function x/x . "
Nonsense. x/x is a number. Any expression must evaluate to a number because if it does not, then you are no longer dealing with mathematics (which is the science of measure and number), but something else.
x/x is not a function. f(x) = x/x is a function and it is *exactly* equivalent to f(x)=1 for IF x/x is not 1, then it can't be anything else but gibberish.
In order to be part of an arithmetical expression, the measure of a magnitude must be a well-formed number (Because ... A number is a name given to a measure of a magnitude or size). For example x/x implies that x is a number. Fools in mainstream math academia love to fool themselves into believing that 0 is a number and that 0/0 is meaningless. In fact, they need 0 to be a number so that they can punch holes in functions, for otherwise 𝛿 > 0 and ε > 0 are not possible and their hand waving calculus fails even more dismally than just being circular. So on the one hand they will say 0/0 is not allowed, but then claim that 0 is a number.
Only problem is that arithmetic operations (which are transferred from geometry) require *magnitudes* for both operands, whereas 0 cannot be an operand for any of the arithmetic operations simply because 0 is NOT a magnitude. To wit, 0 in addition and subtraction is a NON-OPERATION. In multiplication it is an "acceptable kludge" to the Church Of Academia orangutans since multiply any equation such as 3x = 6 by 0 results in 0 = 0, meaning the equation is destroyed. Therefore even multiplication by 0 fails.
Multiplication actually fails in general for any non-magnitude because it is derived from division, ie, p/q x r/s = pr/qs IF AND ONLY IF, p/q -:- s/r AND r/s -:- q/p are possible. ZERO is not a number! It is a useful place holder and disambiguation in communicating number without a radix template. Nothing else.
Dan Christensen
Oct 16, 2021, 8:42:25 AM10/16/21
to
STUDENTS BEWARE: Don't be a victim of JG's fake math
Wrong again, Troll Boy. Zero actually is a number. What a moron!
On Saturday, October 16, 2021 at 2:10:51 AM UTC-4, I am Super Rectum (aka John Gabriel (JG), Troll Boy) wrote:
> Some idiot called...
JG here claims to have a discovered a shortcut to mastering calculus without using limits. Unfortunately for him, this means he has no workable a definition of the derivative of a function. It blows up for functions as simple f(x)=|x|. Or even f(x)=0. As a result, he has had to ban 0, negative numbers and instantaneous rates of change rendering his goofy little system quite useless. What a moron!
Forget calculus. JG has also banned all axioms because he cannot even derive the most elementary results of basic arithmetic, e.g. 2+2=4. Such results require the use of axioms, so he must figure he's now off the hook. Again, what a moron!
Even at his advanced age (60+?), John Gabriel is STILL struggling with basic, elementary-school arithmetic. As he has repeatedly posted here:
"There are no points on a line."
--April 12, 2021
"Pi is NOT a number of ANY kind!"
--July 10, 2020
"1/2 not equal to 2/4"
--October 22, 2017
“1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that”
-- February 8, 2015
"3 =< 4 is nonsense.”
--October 28, 2017
"Zero is not a number."
-- Dec. 2, 2019
"0 is not required at all in mathematics, just like negative numbers."
-- Jan. 4, 2017
“There is no such thing as an empty set.”
--Oct. 4, 2019
“3 <=> 2 + 1 or 3 <=> 8 - 5, etc, are all propositions” (actually all are meaningless gibberish)
--Oct. 22, 2019
No math genius our JG, though he actually lists his job title as “mathematician” at Linkedin.com. Apparently, they do not verify your credentials.
Though really quite disturbing, interested readers should see: “About the spamming troll John Gabriel in his own words...” (lasted updated March 10, 2020) at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.math/PcpAzX5pDeY/1PDiSlK_BwAJ
Dan
Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog a http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
Wrong again, Troll Boy. Zero actually is a number. What a moron!
On Saturday, October 16, 2021 at 2:10:51 AM UTC-4, I am Super Rectum (aka John Gabriel (JG), Troll Boy) wrote:
> Some idiot called...
JG here claims to have a discovered a shortcut to mastering calculus without using limits. Unfortunately for him, this means he has no workable a definition of the derivative of a function. It blows up for functions as simple f(x)=|x|. Or even f(x)=0. As a result, he has had to ban 0, negative numbers and instantaneous rates of change rendering his goofy little system quite useless. What a moron!
Forget calculus. JG has also banned all axioms because he cannot even derive the most elementary results of basic arithmetic, e.g. 2+2=4. Such results require the use of axioms, so he must figure he's now off the hook. Again, what a moron!
Even at his advanced age (60+?), John Gabriel is STILL struggling with basic, elementary-school arithmetic. As he has repeatedly posted here:
"There are no points on a line."
--April 12, 2021
"Pi is NOT a number of ANY kind!"
--July 10, 2020
"1/2 not equal to 2/4"
--October 22, 2017
“1/3 does NOT mean 1 divided by 3 and never has meant that”
-- February 8, 2015
"3 =< 4 is nonsense.”
--October 28, 2017
"Zero is not a number."
-- Dec. 2, 2019
"0 is not required at all in mathematics, just like negative numbers."
-- Jan. 4, 2017
“There is no such thing as an empty set.”
--Oct. 4, 2019
“3 <=> 2 + 1 or 3 <=> 8 - 5, etc, are all propositions” (actually all are meaningless gibberish)
--Oct. 22, 2019
No math genius our JG, though he actually lists his job title as “mathematician” at Linkedin.com. Apparently, they do not verify your credentials.
Though really quite disturbing, interested readers should see: “About the spamming troll John Gabriel in his own words...” (lasted updated March 10, 2020) at https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/sci.math/PcpAzX5pDeY/1PDiSlK_BwAJ
Dan
Download my DC Proof 2.0 freeware at http://www.dcproof.com
Visit my Math Blog a http://www.dcproof.wordpress.com
mitchr...@gmail.com
Oct 16, 2021, 6:24:09 PM10/16/21
to
Zero is a number as it is a name for the absence of a quantity.
There is no below smallest quantity and no quantity.
Gabriel? Do you not need it to set base quantity?
Mitchell Raemsch
There is no below smallest quantity and no quantity.
Gabriel? Do you not need it to set base quantity?
Mitchell Raemsch
Mathin3D
Oct 16, 2021, 6:28:21 PM10/16/21
to
You waste a lot of disk space on YouTube with you idiocy.
zelos...@gmail.com
Oct 17, 2021, 9:19:53 AM10/17/21
to
0 new messages