[Jiggerj]

Okay, I just woke up and have had only one cup of coffee so far this morning, so I'm not quite awake yet. When I'm in this sleepy-time condition I tend to wander aimlessly through the internet. This morning I found myself looking at a youtube clip claiming that 0+0=1. And all of the comments on that page were having a grand old time bashing the poster of this clip. (I clicked out of youtube and now I can't find the clip again.)

Anyway, while having my first smoke outside, my mind began to wonder how and why 0+0=1 could come even close to being a true statement. What I came up with is probably laughable, but could you kind people of a higher intelligence than mine (any IQ above 40 should do it) explain why or why not this couldn't be correct?

When looking at 0+0=1 the zeroes don't mean anything. They have no value, so we can just erase them. Now the statement looks like this + =1. Since nothing is being added together, the math symbols can also be erased. That leaves just the number 1.

Some would say (probably everyone on this planet), "NO! 0+0=0 !!!!" But that isn't even an equation. The zeroes are just place holders that can be erased, so what we're actually looking at is + = .

So, can 0+0=1 possibly be true?

P.S. I did a search here to make sure this idea hasn't been discussed before. It hasn't (probably for a good reason). So, don't go hatin' on me, I'm just looking for some easy chat this morning.

[DrRocket]

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Okay, I just woke up and have had only one cup of coffee so far this morning, so I'm not quite awake yet. When I'm in this sleepy-time condition I tend to wander aimlessly through the internet. This morning I found myself looking at a youtube clip claiming that 0+0=1. And all of the comments on that page were having a grand old time bashing the poster of this clip. (I clicked out of youtube and now I can't find the clip again.)

Anyway, while having my first smoke outside, my mind began to wonder how and why 0+0=1 could come even close to being a true statement. What I came up with is probably laughable, but could you kind people of a higher intelligence than mine (any IQ above 40 should do it) explain why or why not this couldn't be correct?

When looking at 0+0=1 the zeroes don't mean anything. They have no value, so we can just erase them. Now the statement looks like this + =1. Since nothing is being added together, the math symbols can also be erased. That leaves just the number 1.

Some would say (probably everyone on this planet), "NO! 0+0=0 !!!!" But that isn't even an equation. The zeroes are just place holders that can be erased, so what we're actually looking at is + = .

So, can 0+0=1 possibly be true?

P.S. I did a search here to make sure this idea hasn't been discussed before. It hasn't (probably for a good reason). So, don't go hatin' on me, I'm just looking for some easy chat this morning.

Have another cup of coffee.

[insane_alien]

0+0=0 IS an equation.

in practical terms, If i have zero chickens and I buy zero chickens, I have zero chickens. not one chicken.

also if we assume 0+0=1 then that simplifies to 2*0=1 so 0=1/2 and then 1=0.5

we have contradictions and you can carry this on to all the numbers equal each other. This would render maths useless.

from this, we can conclude that 0+0=1 is false.

I don't get why you think 0 is a place holder. It has a specific value. If 0 is a place holder then so are the other numbers.

[ajb]

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

When looking at 0+0=1 the zeroes don't mean anything. They have no value, so we can just erase them.

No, the notation 0 refers to a very special number that has the properties

0 * a = 0
0 + a = a

We do think of zero as "taking a value" simply because it is a well defined real number.

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Now the statement looks like this + =1. Since nothing is being added together, the math symbols can also be erased. That leaves just the number 1.

This does not make sense.

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Some would say (probably everyone on this planet), "NO! 0+0=0 !!!!" But that isn't even an equation. The zeroes are just place holders that can be erased, so what we're actually looking at is + = .

Not true. 0+0 = 0 is a perfectly correct equality.

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

So, can 0+0=1 possibly be true?

This would mean that 0 = 1.

Now have a think about the properties of both these numbers.

DrRocket, on 11 February 2012 - 05:59 PM, said:

Have another cup of coffee.

Very sound advice when it come to preparing for mathematical studies.

[Jiggerj]

ajb, on 11 February 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

No, the notation 0 refers to a very special number that has the properties

0 * a = 0
0 + a = a

We do think of zero as "taking a value" simply because it is a well defined real number.

lol Well you're a lot smarter than I am! I am of the assumption that zero is the utter absence of value.
----------------------------------------------------------
Just googled 'What is zero' and got this:

ze·ro/ˈzi(ə)rō/ No quantity or number

insane_alien, on 11 February 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

from this, we can conclude that 0+0=1 is false.

Now, please remember that I know that 0+0=0, but for the sake of discussion can we say that there is no substance in the universe (be it matter or energy) that can be reduced to nothing? I mean, try as we might to pulverize something into non-existence, it just can't be done - something always remains, be it just one particle, one atom, one quark... So, in reverse, our starting point in creating anything must at least be 1 (one particle of something).

What is the point in saying: "In order to cook a scrambled egg we need to start with Nothing plus One Egg?" Isn't this simply stating that we are going to start with One Egg?

(Going for my second cup of coffee. God, I hope it helps. lol)

insane_alien, on 11 February 2012 - 06:02 PM, said:

I don't get why you think 0 is a place holder. It has a specific value. If 0 is a place holder then so are the other numbers.

Any number above zero is a stand-in for something: 1/2 an hour, 1 computer, 12 eggs...

Zero, however, means nothing, points to nothing, implies nothing.

Can anyone show me an equation with a zero in it where the zero can't simply be removed without changing the value of the equation? (Ick! Did that make any sense at all?)

One more time: Show me an equation that would change as a direct result of erasing a zero.


1+0=1 (Now remove the zero.) 1=1

[ajb]

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

Just googled 'What is zero' and got this:

ze·ro/ˈzi(ə)rō/ No quantity or number

The trouble here is that zero is a number. Think of it as the additive identity for the real line.

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 08:04 PM, said:

One more time: Show me an equation that would change as a direct result of erasing a zero.

You mean by just adding or taking away zero. Well, any such equality is rather trivial via 0+ a = a-0 = a.

When we multiply by zero we are in very different situation. Formally, zero is the only non-invertible element of the real line. That is we cannot define another member of the real line, which we denote such that .

Think about it.

[Xittenn]

If my post is out of place I understand, I apologize, and I thank you to just kindly delete it.

I think that statements like these are more theological, and that they are made with the intent of sounding sophisticated, when in fact they are not. I will try to reword the statement in a way that might reflect the context under which it may have been given. With all things being equal, under principles of reducibility, because nothing is something, and therefore all things are nothing, anything can be anything. Theological conjectures like these are great at cocktail parties where everyone has had a little too much to drink. The sad reality of statements like these are they devaluate all of life as we know it. You mentioned smoking and this brings up another good point. Points of view like this actually have a very deep impact on the human mind. Often young individuals who are experimenting with drug use find interest in statements like these (i.e. high school and college students in particular students working in the arts.) When they do and they can't explain the idea in their head--or adequately debunk the concept for what it is--they can feel devaluated. Believe it or not but thoughts like these have been known to lead underdeveloped minds to suicide and I believe this is actually a driving force in their circulation amongst would be 'deep thinkers.' This is not really a math question and the persistence of some is kind of sick when you think about it no? At any rate, these are my thoughts on the subject!

[Jiggerj]

ajb, on 11 February 2012 - 09:59 PM, said:

When we multiply by zero we are in very different situation. Formally, zero is the only non-invertible element of the real line. That is we cannot define another member of the real line, which we denote such that .

Think about it.

Think about it? I can't even say it! lolololol

Xittenn, on 11 February 2012 - 11:01 PM, said:

If my post is out of place I understand, I apologize, and I thank you to just kindly delete it.

Believe it or not but thoughts like these have been known to lead underdeveloped minds to suicide and I believe this is actually a driving force in their circulation amongst would be 'deep thinkers.' This is not really a math question and the persistence of some is kind of sick when you think about it no? At any rate, these are my thoughts on the subject!

For me, it's just a passing interest because I don't have the math skills to persue it deeper. However, I recently watched a documentary that validates your point. Men have literally driven themselves mad trying to define infinity through math. I'll see if I can find the link.

Here if you want: http://topdocumentar...rous-knowledge/

"In this one-off documentary, David Malone looks at four brilliant mathematicians – Georg Cantor, Ludwig Boltzmann, Kurt Gödel and Alan Turing – whose genius has profoundly affected us, but which tragically drove them insane and eventually led to them all committing suicide."

P.S. Honest input that doesn't ridicule or insult is always welcome in my threads!

[DrRocket]

Jiggerj, on 11 February 2012 - 11:43 PM, said:

Men have literally driven themselves mad trying to define infinity through math. I'll see if I can find the link.

Here if you want: http://topdocumentar...rous-knowledge/

Mathematicians handle infinity, all kinds of infinities, with regularity. There is no mystery and little difficulty.

The "documentary" at that link is apparently as big a crock as the description would lead one to believe and has been removed by the user.

[Jiggerj]

DrRocket, on 11 February 2012 - 11:51 PM, said:

Mathematicians handle infinity, all kinds of infinities, with regularity. There is no mystery and little difficulty.

The "documentary" at that link is apparently as big a crock as the description would lead one to believe and has been removed by the user.

Wow! Then here:
http://www.youtube.c...985l0.3.5.1l9l0

[DrRocket]

Jiggerj, on 12 February 2012 - 12:28 AM, said:

Wow! Then here:
http://www.youtube.c...985l0.3.5.1l9l0

I have seen enought just from the synopsis.

Why waste time with trash when there is so much available with real content ?

http://www.vega.org....deo/subseries/8

[PeterJ]

Xittenn, on 11 February 2012 - 11:01 PM, said:

If my post is out of place I understand, I apologize, and I thank you to just kindly delete it.

I think that statements like these are more theological, and that they are made with the intent of sounding sophisticated, when in fact they are not. I will try to reword the statement in a way that might reflect the context under which it may have been given. With all things being equal, under principles of reducibility, because nothing is something, and therefore all things are nothing, anything can be anything. Theological conjectures like these are great at cocktail parties where everyone has had a little too much to drink. The sad reality of statements like these are they devaluate all of life as we know it. You mentioned smoking and this brings up another good point. Points of view like this actually have a very deep impact on the human mind. Often young individuals who are experimenting with drug use find interest in statements like these (i.e. high school and college students in particular students working in the arts.) When they do and they can't explain the idea in their head--or adequately debunk the concept for what it is--they can feel devaluated. Believe it or not but thoughts like these have been known to lead underdeveloped minds to suicide and I believe this is actually a driving force in their circulation amongst would be 'deep thinkers.' This is not really a math question and the persistence of some is kind of sick when you think about it no? At any rate, these are my thoughts on the subject!

Maybe it is not a maths question but it has some interest in metaphysics. (Thus the theological connection). Here it is zero as a concept, or as representing a void, that is interesting, rather than its role as a number. We might say that zero is a concept, so it is not nothing. Thus a void would be something and not nothing etc. From this kind of thinking we get to Lao Tsu's point, 'the zero begets the one'. Not mathematics, no, but it's this kind of thinking that stoned high school kids may get into. Especially since it implies something prior to zero.

'The Nothing That Is - A History of Zero' by Stuart Kaplan is worth a read. Mostly mathematics and social history. He leaves the metaphysics mostly to the very end but he does make the connection.

[questionposter]

0+0=1...times 0

This post has been edited by questionposter: 17 February 2012 - 01:13 AM

[ajb]

PeterJ, on 16 February 2012 - 01:52 PM, said:

Maybe it is not a maths question but it has some interest in metaphysics. (Thus the theological connection). Here it is zero as a concept, or as representing a void, that is interesting, rather than its role as a number. We might say that zero is a concept, so it is not nothing. Thus a void would be something and not nothing etc. From this kind of thinking we get to Lao Tsu's point, 'the zero begets the one'. Not mathematics, no, but it's this kind of thinking that stoned high school kids may get into. Especially since it implies something prior to zero.

I remember being told of some confusion that once arose between a lecturer and a student. The lecturer's first language was not English. The lecturer posed some question. The student answered "nothing". The lecturer was very puzzled by this answer and then stated that the answer is not nothing, the answer is zero.

I think it is a true story, but I did hear it second hand.

Anyway, my coffee is ready

[Jiggerj]

ajb, on 17 February 2012 - 08:01 AM, said:

I remember being told of some confusion that once arose between a lecturer and a student. The lecturer's first language was not English. The lecturer posed some question. The student answered "nothing". The lecturer was very puzzled by this answer and then stated that the answer is not nothing, the answer is zero.

I think it is a true story, but I did hear it second hand.

Anyway, my coffee is ready

LOL I also remember a story of a man that shut everything off in his house for a month while he went on vacation. When he returned he received a bill from the electric company for $0.00. The man decided to ignore all the notices to pay $0.00 until he received a threatening shut off notice. His only recourse was to send the company a check for $0.00, which, according to the story, broke the computer.

[khaled]

Let's share a fun fact: In tennis game Score zero is called 'Love' "Love is Zero", meaning "to play without any wager, for nothing"
.. a Score "Zero to Zero" is called "Love for all"

Source [Book]: The Guinness Book of Tennis Facts & Feats and Fifteen Love

This post has been edited by khaled: 17 February 2012 - 10:39 AM