Does Zero Exist?

And 1 will never equal 0 unless you use imaginary numbers. And this is why I hate math...because if it doesn't work, you just make something up, slap a label on it and insert it. Voila! Complete equation.

You can't do that in construction (the primary use of mathematics), so why do it with theoretical equations?

0 is nothing and something.
0 imeans nothing exists.
0 exists for man as a starting point of measurement either + or -
If someone offers you half of what they have in their hand or double , and they have nothing .
Who will get more and who will get less ?

reply to post by Starchild23

Also, a rope that is infinitely long has no tension in it, which means the knot will stay precisely as it is, indefinitely

No it wont.

A rope that is infinitely long has no tension that is right. It is neutral. But the knot is not neutral, it is compressed. The knot is compressed energy. It has tension.

So you have two different states. One neutral and one compressed. The compressed state will always try to become neutral by expansion.

Heat will always expand. Never retract or stay neutral.

Nothing exists as such.
Suchness, isness is all.
All is fleeting.

Only you are eternal.

Never mind math!!! Take a 1 inch piece of string and cut it in half, keep one piece and cut it in half again, and again, and again, and keep on cutting it in half, eventually you're going to get into particle world but don't worry about that because you're just going to keep cutting those in half, then you're going to get so small we haven't discovered it yet but have no fear just keep cutting in half and when you eventually get to nothing it will only mean you've lost the ability to track it. It's still there, it has to be otherwise you'd have nothing...And that's not a possibility!

reply to post by IrnBruFiend


zero, as a 'number', is a concept representing total absence. It is not a number. It is a concept.

You don't count zero. You ignore zero. It is nonexistant.

It is the paradox behind me saying "Nothing cannot exist". Because to exist you are something. And therefore no longer zero.

If you really meditate on this, you can discover that the birth of consciousness is the progression from zero to 1. Once you realize you exist, you have consciousness, so to speak.

I think a deeper question is whether or not numbers actually "exist." That was placed in quotations for a reason. The concept of existence can mean either existing in the objective world or within the subjective. If we are dealing with objective realities, I'd say numbers don't exist at all. Rather, it could be said that numbers are subjective descriptions we create in order to categorize objective phenomenon.

What I mean by subjective is not that each individual has an opinion or feeling, but that the semantics represent an internal categorization with a function of understanding or utilizing objective phenomenon.

Great! Another thread about zero. The mental masturbation is strong in this one -- might as well throw you all some curve balls to spice up the fun. What does zero mean? What does exist mean?

So many people in here are using asymptotic calculations (eg.. endless cutting things in half) to answer the original op question of whether Zero exists or not. They have nothing to do with what Zero is, or is not. Zero simply means the absence of anything. Hold an apple in one hand, and no apple in the other, then you can say you have Zero apples in that hand, but that hand is not empty. Zero is not a number, it is a concept, and is actually an impossible goal.

Just recently, we had the 5 sigma result from the Hadron Collider. A further proof that there is no such thing as ZERO as a quantity, because even in what we call nothing, a total vacuum (which is also impossible) there is always something... a Higgs field, filled with particles called the Higgs Boson, which gives mass to everything other than an electron that passes through it.

reply to post by IrnBruFiend

Yes but it's hiding between 1 and -1
like a no sided bullseye point inside opposing points

Mathematical 0 has various interpretations.

1) Place holder. E.g. in the number 1000 the zero's just mean this column is empty.
2) Number. E.g. 1-1=0. Could mean if you have one thing in a box and take it out then you get an empty box.
3) Nothingness. E.g. 1-1=0. Could mean if you destroy the one thing then you have nothingness in its place.
4) Limit. 0 is the limit as n gets larger and larger in 1/n.
5) Line. 0 is equidistant between -1 and 1 on the number line.

1) and 2) seem ok but 3) not so because nothingness appears undefinable.

If you could define nothingness then it would be something and not nothingness. Corollary: something must always exist physically since nothingness is impossible.

4) is not ok because you can never get to 0. So 0 as a limit is undefined. If it could be reached it would be nothingness so the same as case 3.

5) First you have to define -1 which seems a problem. It has no meaning in the physical world. Antiparticles do not anihilate to nothingness on meeting they produce energy. Also, since 0 in this case can be approached by 1/n like case 4, then if it was definable here it would be nothingness again so the same as case 3.

So it looks like 0 exists only in interpretations 1) and 2) where it is just a marker for an empty space or an empty column. Please note that an empty space allows movement and so is not nothingness.

reply to post by IrnBruFiend


Zero and infinity are abstract concepts. More artistic in nature than mathematical... That means the language used to define science, mathematics is sandwiched between two non definable concepts.. Not a very good foundation and cap stone..

originally posted by: TomServo
Apply the bread slicing comcept to falling. If an object falls off a building, over a period of time, it will fall half way. Then it will fall half way again, and again, and again... So to test the concept, you could jump off a building, and tell me if you ever reach the bottom.

I jest... The point is.. all numbers are actually meaningless without a reference. 0 is typically that reference we assign to the beginning. consider the object you throw off the building. It begins from a realative height. But height from what? in the case of the bread, eventually you will be halving atoms, muons, quarks, etc... I'd rather jump off a building in that case. So I guess in short, dangerous things happen when you approach 0...

. It does look like starring down the barrel of a gun though. Don't shoot the crows.

originally posted by: IrnBruFiend
If you take any number, and keep halving the value, you will never get to zero. This problem in mathematics is most famously known as the Zeno's paradox. Here's an analogy: Take a piece of bread, with a length of 1. Slice it in half and you have 0.5. Slice it in half again and you have 0.25. Slice it in half again and you have 0.125, etc, etc. You will find the number continues on infinitely when halved and will never reach zero. Theoretically, if you keep slicing the piece of bread in half you will never ever cut the whole thing.

Zeno proved that 'motion' is not logically possible.
An un-refuted claim, as yet!
But your question of the existence of '0', well, there it is!
Moss it?
Here you go again '0', and for the hard of hearing, 'zero'! *__-

EVERYTHING EXISTS!
If you can name something, question it's existence, then it exists!

Here is One (unchanging (thank you Zeno), ALL inclusive) Universal Reality! Here! Now!

Everything in the physical universe must be made out of at least 1 if something. Yes / no?

And yet the Universe, when examined past the 'appearances of physicality and the schizophrenic fragmentation of that which is One', IS One!
And the concept of 'zero', and the written symbol, and it's use in math and poetry and literature... all exist!
Here! Now!

This concept draws parallels with infinity. You can take any number and double it to an infinite degree.

You do not Know this; you infer it, you imagine it, you believe it, you theorize it, you hypothesize it... but Knowledge = experience/perception, and, thus, you do not, nor can anyone, Know it.
That which is not Known, cannot exist.
All is Known!
'Eternal'/'Infinite' can only relate to the 'timelessness' of Reality, which erroneously is called 'eternal/infinite' imagining all moments strung together, like a strand of pearls!
But a Planck moment is, literally, timeless!
And you can string all the 'zeros' together and all you end with is '0'!!
The entirety of Universal existence a mere synchronous moment, Here! Now!

Also, you can take any number and half it to an infinite degree. You can never begin with zero; and you can never reach zero. Another example of this can be found in fractals. Below is a visual demonstration of a fractal known as the Cantor set.

Sorry, but math is a great mental Rubik's Cube/masturbation, but;

"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain; and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."
-- Albert Einstein
Quoted in J R Newman, The World of Mathematics

No one ever broke open a rock and found a '1'!

What is the smallest thing in the physical universe? Can it be halved? Can it be halved again? If we know what the smallest thing in the universe is, and know it can't be halved for definite, that's fine. Problem solved.

A Planck volume (a Soul), is the smallest that anything can be!

The 'size' of one unique Perspective, one unique Soul, is one Planck 'volume', equal to the cube of the Planck length (1.6 x 10^-35 meters^3 = one Planck length times one Planck length, and the results squared!)!

Or is it? What are the implications for the subject of mathematics which is (at least what I consider) the purest of all subjects.

Again that weird claim of 'purity'!
I smell a 'belief'.

Math is always correct. Isn't it?

No, it is not.
Is 1+1 ALWAYS 2?
Or us that only under certain, very limiting conditions, not the least is that you need to be dealing in a 'base ten' system!?

If we conclude a particular constitute of a particular can't be halved in the physical universe, does this imply math, being the pure subject that it is,

...the 'pure subject' that "YOU CONSIDER it to be"!

doesn't accurately correlate with the physical universe?

As Einstein said, no, it doesn't!
And your insistence of using 'physical' will warp your contemplations.
'Physical' is merely an appearance of 'magnification', Perspective!
Everything that you are calling 'physical', when examined deeply enough, is all made of the same thing; information waves, Mindstuff!
From the hardest rock to the hottest sun to dreams and notions!
Everything!

What if the smallest constitute of the universe can be halved infinitely? Does this imply infinity is a reality and that mathematics is always pure in our understanding of the universe?

Your use of 'pure' denotes a 'belief infection' that you are attempting to validate!
Math is no more 'pure' than any daydreaming!
It is all imagination!

Moreover, I have wondered about the Big Bang theory in relation to this.

That's for another night.

Can zero exist and not exist?

Everything exists, and doesn't exist!