JT
Posts:
1,434
Registered:
4/7/12


Re: Which naturals better?
Posted:
Feb 5, 2013 2:55 AM


On 5 Feb, 07:58, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 5 Feb, 07:43, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 5 Feb, 04:30, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 4 Feb, 11:02, Frederick Williams <freddywilli...@btinternet.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > JT wrote: > > > > > > Building new natural numbers without zero using NyaN, in any base, > > > > > [...] > > > > > You seem to confuse numbers and digits. Both of these are true: > > > > There is a number zero. > > > > Numbers can be symbolized without the digit zero. > > > > >  > > > > When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by > > > > this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. > > > > Jonathan Swift: Thoughts on Various Subjects, Moral and Diverting > > > > No there is no zero in my list of naturals, in my list is each natural > > > number a discrete ***items***, ***entity*** with a magnitude. > > > Sorry a single natural is a single entity or item with a certain > > magnitude, the numbers is counted in forming sets. > > From this follow that a single natural have a start and end point, And > you can partition the single natural using any base.
From this follow also that there is no endpoint in the naturals they are counted in so infinity is not in the set of naturals no more then zero is in the set of naturals. Zero is only the concept of empty/void(lack of numerable entities)/ null it is not mathematical, likewise infinity is only the concept of larger there is no numerbable set containing infinity, there is not the set of all natural numbers, because you can not count to infinity and you can not count zero Because zero have no magnitude and can not be counted in it simply describe empty,void,null and infinity have no specific magnitude it can not be counted in it simlpy describe something bigger then the countable.

