Does 0+0=0?

Does zero exist in math? If it doesn't exist, then how come you can add two zeros together? And if you can add two zeros together, then how can those two zeros equal only one zero? Doesn't the equation 0+0=0 contain an inconsistency? Isn't math implying that zero exists, but has no size? That is why you can add two zeros together and get a result of one zero. You can't do that with any other number, e.g. 1+1=2 not 1. How can zero exist and yet not have any size? Does zero really have a size, but it is so small that it nearly approached a perfect zero, and that therefore its miniscule size is irrelevant to mathematical equations?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Voodoo. Think about it.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I thought about it, and unfortunately, have no idea what you're talking about. Please explain.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Zero is just a placeholder. It's a numerical representation of none of something.
For instance, imagine that you go looking for money on the street (come on I need an example lol).
You decide to put any money you find in an empty purse you carry.
You spend the whole day looking for money on the street, but find nothing.
At the end of the day you look in your purse and see no coins in there.
The numerical representation of 'no coins' is 0 coins.

You may want to take a look at the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/0_(number)
And this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_number#History_of_natural_numbers_and_the_status_of_zero

 

Think hard. Really hard.

 

Oh, I get it. That's really clever. Did you work that out yourself or did you read about it ?

 

Another one about free hamburgers

 

OK. You're saying that there is a flaw in 0+0=0. But mathematicians simply ignore it and pretend there is no inconsistency. Am I right?

 

If zero is just a placeholder, then how come you can add two of them together? Moreover, if zero is just a placeholder, then what place is it holding when it's by itself? I get that a zero in "10" in a place holder for single digits. But, when it's by itself, what place is it holding?

 

You don't actually add them.
See the wiki articles first please..

 

Reading your website posts, one states:"With this definition, it was convenient to include zero (corresponding to the empty set) as a natural number." Are you saying zero is just a mathematical convenience, and that it really doen't exist at all? And if that is what you're saying, then why would it be convenient to say 0+0=0? What possible convenience is there to multiple zeros being added together?

 

I can't pretend that it's my idea. It's a deep concept that goes back to the days of Riemann and Gauss.

 

How is it that you don't actually add two zeros together, when that is exactly what 0+0 stands for? Why put an "+" sign between two zeros, if you didn't intend to add them together?

 

You're pretty much on the money. Don't tell anyone though: mathematicians are trying to keep it on the down low! It's one of the many conspiracies deep seated in the mathematical community (others include the rationality of pi, the fact that 0.9r<1 and that the number 7 doesn't actually exist).

 

Your humor is appreciated, but I would appreciate an actual answer moreso.

 

Don't ask me, I don't see the point of it either

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Well, I am guesing you're not a mathematician. If you were, you probably wouldn't be so quick to admit the inconsistency.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yes? Think about it...

 

I'm not saying it's inconsistent. I'm just saying there's no point in it other then for clarification.
And, no I'm not a mathemagician

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

But clarification is a point. You clarify to understand something new. Do you think zero has any size whatsover?