Is this a correct way to describe number sets?

  • I
  • Thread starter Logical Dog
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Sets
In summary: So ##1## is a special number because it doesn't have a predecessor, and all others have a successor and a predecessor.
  • #36
Compromise:

natural.png


Include 0 only half. Is that natural enough?
 
  • Like
Likes member 587159 and S.G. Janssens
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #37
mfb said:
Compromise:

View attachment 106007

Include 0 only half. Is that natural enough?
We have to ask the Indians. As far as I know they have the copyright on the ##0##. I'm sure we've had numbers when we lived in Africa, but it took a civilization to use the ##0##. Probably some bookies ...
 
  • #38
fresh_42 said:
We have to ask the Indians. As far as I know they have the copyright on the ##0##. I'm sure we've had numbers when we lived in Africa, but it took a civilization to use the ##0##. Probably some bookies ...

Some tribes count as ##1,2,3,\text{many}##. So I deny that the number ##10## is very natural.
 
  • #39
micromass said:
Some tribes count as ##1,2,3,\text{many}##. So I deny that the number ##10## is very natural.
It's just another name for 2. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes S.G. Janssens

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
613
Replies
5
Views
892
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
85
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
13
Views
2K
Back
Top