> It has often been stated to me as zero and suc(0). I don't agree that > zero is a natural number but for what it's worth there it is. >
But surely you agree that 1 is the loneliest number?
Although there are some who claim that 2 can be as bad as 1, it is generally accepted [*] that 2 is the loneliest number /since/ the number 1. It has also been more directly claimed that 1 is strictly worse than 2, "whoah-oh" [ibid].
> Except this seems to define a sphere.
In fact, a 1-sphere; also known as a circle. It's been conjectured to be the loneliest n-sphere since the 0-sphere; although Nilsson et al have yet to express an opinion on this.
Cheers - Chas
[*] H. Nilsson, "One", 1969. Performed by 3 Dog Night.