Thallium
- 231
- 0
I have heard that today's mathematicians are discussing what zero really is. Are there any good resources on this on the net?
The forum discussion centers on the philosophical and mathematical implications of zero, highlighting its historical acceptance and significance in mathematics. Participants debate the nature of zero, distinguishing it from concepts like nothingness and emptiness. Key mathematical facts about zero include its role in addition and multiplication, as well as its implications in limit theory. Resources shared include links to discussions on the historical context of zero and its mathematical properties.
PREREQUISITESMathematicians, philosophy students, educators, and anyone interested in the foundational concepts of mathematics and their implications in both theoretical and practical contexts.
Originally posted by Thallium
I have heard that today's mathematicians are discussing what zero really is.
Originally posted by Thallium
Where I heard of it? A long time ago on a TV programme about science. There was a Denish professor in maths there. I believe this has to do with finding a different of calculation in maths.
Originally posted by quartodeciman
limx->af(x)/g(x), where limx->ag(x)=0. They want to use as a general rule
limx->af(x)/g(x) = limx->af(x)/limx->ag(x)
, but it won't work. The problem lies in the theory of limits, not in the meaning of zero.
Originally posted by Thallium
I have heard that today's mathematicians are discussing what zero really is. Are there any good resources on this on the net?
Originally posted by deda
On the other hand infinity is the point of extreme chaos.
These are about functions and limits. I try to express in general terms what some people puzzle over specifically. For example: what happens to 1/x as x goes to 0. Well, you get 1/.1. 1/.01, 1/.001 and so on and these are 10, 100 1000 and so on. In view of this, many conclude that 1/0 is infinite. Other cases get more complicated.Originally posted by quartodeciman
limx->af(x)/g(x), where limx->ag(x)=0. They want to use as a general rule
limx->af(x)/g(x) = limx->af(x)/limx->ag(x)
, but it won't work. The problem lies in the theory of limits, not in the meaning of zero.