Is Zero a Concept or a Real Number?

[HHayashi]

Unless you can stop time, you cannot move the exact same apple from bucket one to bucket two. If even a fraction of a second passes, that apple is not the same apple anymore.

 

[chiro]

Unless you can stop time, you cannot move the exact same apple from bucket one to bucket two. If even a fraction of a second passes, that apple is not the same apple anymore.

Assume then that the operation of moving one (or all) apples happens in 'one clock cycle' (which is what happens in your computer hardware as a simplistic explanation).

So let's say we have these values for our 't' where t = 0,1,2,3.

At t = 0 we have empty buckets (x = 0, y = 0). At t = 1 we have bucket 2 with 3 apples (y = 3). At t = 2 those apples are transferred to bucket 1 (x = 3, y = 0). At t = 3 apples go back into bucket 2 (x = 0, y = 3).

We assume nothing happens in-between and things happen at integer values of t in a 'discontinuous' fashion in the same way a computer adds 1 to a number where suddenly after so many clock-cycles, it changes.

 

[Infinitum]

Mathematical numbers are abstract. The numbers you talk about are physical. They -actually- denote something.

I agree with your argument that nothing is the same as before when time is taken into account, but it still matters on how you define that 'thing'. As for chiro's example he defined an apple to be

as long as you have an apple that resembles a whole apple that is 1 apple

And as that apple resembles the original to you, it counts as one. Its just a matter of perspective, I would say.

Take for example the speed of light moving in two spaces A and B of the same vacuum. Subtract these two numbers, what would you get?

 

[HHayashi]

I'm not entirely sure if I understand the question. I think your example is just a computer doing math, in which case it's completely fine. Trying to force my hypothesis into that would be the equivalent of trying to force a movie to follow the laws of physics.

I'm actually completely stumped about the speed of light question. As long as the speed of light is a constant, that will definitely be zero.

 

[HHayashi]

Here's what I have now.

A universal physical constant is something that is universal in nature and constant in time. Speed of light is one such constant. No matter what part of the universe you take it from at any point in time, it will always be the same. So assuming that subtracting the speed of light from the speed of light is possible (which I cannot see any reason why you wouldn't be able to), it would indeed be zero.

As such, anything that is affected by the speed of light and/or any other universal constant can reach zero also. Since everything effects everything in the end, zero is an attainable value.

Thank you all for putting up with me. I can now sleep a little better at night with this question cleared up.

As a side note, the apple question doesn't work because "apple" is not a universal constant. In chiro's example, it's trying to define it as a universal constant when it isn't, unless you were trying to make those apples represent a universal constant.

Edit: After re-reading the question, making those apples represent a universal constant was exactly what you were doing, although in a pretty confusing way. My apologies.