Reply
Tue 8 Mar, 2005 12:49 pm
Including 0 (zero) in:
counting in general
time
days of the month
years
calulations
ages
It is amazing how far and deep this ultimate error went. And it sure got the human race defined as retarted or under some on-going retardation.
If you're going to include "0" then that means you have to start with the very "0" before the "1" in general. And we all honestly can tell that dont go right, and that people have been leaving off the "0" before the "1" just to suit whatever it be.
Hold your hands up!
There cant be 10 fingers there by an actual fact. You either have to count the first finger as "0" on one of your hands. That would make one hand 0-4 and the other hand 5-9.
^^^And that reveals the error and reveals the error is only corrected when you loose "0" in general (Drop the 0, 10, 20, etc; 100, 110, etc; 1000, 1001, 1110, etc--You get the drift--Along with the label names of them).
The definition, to say, 11, should be: Greater than 9, but lesser than 12. On my hand there is 11 fingers in fact, not 10 since we knowing dont count the "0" before the "1"--and even if we did count the "0" before the "1" there still can not be 10 fingers.
Calulations... 5 TIMES 2 (for example) should equal 11 (defined as greater than 9, but lesser than 12).
The world is so in error we must reset a lot.
On a clock... Instead of 1:00 am (which is obviouly not even 1 'O clock because there are two Os) it should be 1:1 am. That's right, not 1:01 am, 1:1 am. You can guess what the rest should be concerning time on a watch or on a clock. The only honest thing shaped as an "O" is the shape of the round clock itself, because acually "0" (zero) has an oval shape.
In a month... We obviously dont go it's March 0...No, we go it's March 1st... So then, again, there shouldnt be a "0" in any bit of any mouth.
"0" shows no means or no value.
In age... It is still in error even though the "0" is counted because of the rest I just went over. When a baby comes just out of their mother are they in "0" hours (though we know there is an hour upon?), "0" months (though we know a mouth is upon?), and "0" years (though we know a year is upon?)? I tell you, they are of that hour (which is valued as an hour) and of that mouth (which is valued as a month) and of that year (which is valued as a year). For they are of the earth.
No need to go back in time an correct from there, but we can correct the error henceforth when we want from now. Right now it's such a dark era of error we under. How can we correct the year without going back in time? It's simple, just state it's 2115 instead of 2005 and go from there. And some time right then some of us literally will have left the dark ages. Correcting the error where you stand puts you a century ahead. You'd look back and say it was the smartest move.
And dont forget to add states on the list. There isnt a single state counted as "0" (0st? 0th?) so there cant be a 10th, 20th, 30th, 40th, or 50th state.
The U.S. is 51 states in fact.
2,4,6,8,11 = even numbers.
1,3,5,7,9 = odd numbers.
0,10,20,30,40 = even odder numbers--Get it? even odder? These are a paradox.
Have fun doing multiplication with roman numerals.
0 is the number signifying absence. 0 fingers would be before you count the fingers, and the first finger you count would be 1. It works well with the decimal system as we have the ones and tens, etc digits.
10
there is a one in the tens digit and a 0 in the ones digit, of course you could just say this as 10 ones.
Sign related
I can recommend a good consultant psychologist, but you probably cant afford it.
I want some of whatever your on Sign.
Re: You know what's in error? (shattering a certain paradox)
Sign Related 2 wrote:Hold your hands up!
There cant be 10 fingers there by an actual fact. You either have to count the first finger as "0" on one of your hands. That would make one hand 0-4 and the other hand 5-9.
^^^And that reveals the error and reveals the error is only corrected when you loose "0" in general (Drop the 0, 10, 20, etc; 100, 110, etc; 1000, 1001, 1110, etc--You get the drift--Along with the label names of them).
[/quote
Try this little test. Take 10 pencils and put them on a table in front of you and number them. Using your terminology they would be numbered "0" though "9". Now remove all the pencils from the table.
Please post back here the numeric value of the number of pencils left on the desk. (Hint: You can't post "0" because if you followed the directions you removed "0" from the table.
)
Quote:0,10,20,30,40 = even odder numbers--Get it? even odder? These are a paradox.
Oh, my! What a little knowledge and a lot of chemicals will produce!
Re: You know what's in error? (shattering a certain paradox)
fishin' wrote:Sign Related 2 wrote:Hold your hands up!
There cant be 10 fingers there by an actual fact. You either have to count the first finger as "0" on one of your hands. That would make one hand 0-4 and the other hand 5-9.
^^^And that reveals the error and reveals the error is only corrected when you loose "0" in general (Drop the 0, 10, 20, etc; 100, 110, etc; 1000, 1001, 1110, etc--You get the drift--Along with the label names of them).
[/quote
Try this little test. Take 10 pencils and put them on a table in front of you and number them. Using your terminology they would be numbered "0" though "9". Now remove all the pencils from the table.
Please post back here the numeric value of the number of pencils left on the desk. (Hint: You can't post "0" because if you followed the directions you removed "0" from the table.
)[/quote]
First of all, I'd go by it being 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9, and 11 pencils put on the table (because I chosen to drop the "0" in general). And then if I took them off the table the numeric value of pencils left on the table would be -1,-2,-3,-4,-5,-6,-7,-8,-9, and -11. Basically, I'd just say -11.
But if I go by the scenario you put word for word. I must say I'm wise enough to notice that the 'table' and the 'desk' are two different things. :wink: Therefore there would have never been any pencils put on the desk.
So you have to try harder than that. And yet in still you shall fail if you keep it up. :wink:
Where's the paradox?
I have ten fingers. I have two feet. I have zero wings.
Zero is a value. You want to remove it? Why not remove "5"? This number is less absolute than the value "0".
I can almost agree that there is a paradox if you are talking about "nothing, nowhere". These words are positivs of negatives. Relativity saves them from being useless paradoxes.
Call it 10, call it 11, call it anything you want. It is merely a symbol to represent a concept and retains the same meaning reguardless of what you name it. "A rose by any other name . . ."
The true paradox here is how Sign Related 2 knows enough concepts to start this thread about these concepts... :wink:
Sign related....2
the minus sign presumably.
Ray wrote:0 is the number signifying absence. 0 fingers would be before you count the fingers, and the first finger you count would be 1. It works well with the decimal system as we have the ones and tens, etc digits.
10
there is a one in the tens digit and a 0 in the ones digit, of course you could just say this as 10 ones.
And if you start with '1' rather than a number that represents adsence, then you'd have to get rid of the other numbers that represent abscene (10, 20, etc; 1,000,000 etc) based on following the suit since it started with 1.
Basically, you cant include 10, 20, etc. as numbers of value/worth if you didnt include 0 as a number value/worth, or else, you'd be admitting a hypocrisy with counting from inside of a paradox.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace