Zero, definition

After viewing a discussion on what is zero it was left a little inconclusive, so my own thoughts came up with the possibility that there could be a difference between numerical zero & absolute zero, does anyone know if the latter state can exist?
If before the big bang there was a state of absolute Zero, i.e. no particles, no energy, no time, would it be considered that this state could not exist?
At this point may I ask if it is okay for a laymen to ask questions on this site? my aim is to just simply to promote thought & discussion for others to read, I am sorry if this offends.

Nice question.

Numerical zero is the symbol for nothing.

Absolute zero is the lowest possible temperature meaning molecules are at the lowest possible activity level.

Current theory is that the big bang began from a singularity which by definition has no identity. Since we are here, my hunch is it was not the same thing as zero.

There must be lots of other thoughts about your question.

Then there is zero as a place holder and zero as a number. The concept of zero as a number in itself did not catch till much later.

Thanks!

Where does zero meaning no operation fit?

There have been papers published that show no singularity is needed, all you need is energy fluctuations that in the end = 0. YOu can have lots of positive energy, lots of negative energy.. so you can have lots of stuff happening that net=0 at the end

0/x =0 . This i think means no operation. But 0-x=-x. This puts zero in the number line. Am not sure of the first example. In an Abacus, if there is no bead at the place holder for say 100, we say there are no hundreds. We don't say there is zero hundreds. The word no suffice. I may be terribly wrong.

The meaning of zero is a bunch of fun, and I gotta throw in one of my favorite conundrums. Suppose there were an infinitely small entity. Where would it ft in the concept of zero?

zero can't be described as 'small' so I would think it would not apply. Even infinitely small is still just small and not zero.

What does 1-0.999... equal?

0.001, not sure what your point is. Zero means all digits are zero, not just the first. I would only need to change the unit size to make it 1.

This post has been edited by mudderrunner on Nov 1 2010, 05:21 PM

I meant 0.999 repeating
an inifinite amount of zeros.

In that case it is easier to understand in reference to the equivalent that you started with. Instead of all those zero's in the result that make you think of zero, think of all those 9's in the initial expression.

(1-1) = 0.
(1-0.999repeating) != (1-1)
therefore, (1-0.999repeating) != 0.

you can also think of it conceptually. Zero is determined while (1-0.999repeating) is not. That is a clear difference.

It's like a particle trying to go the speed of light. It can go infinitely faster but that doesn't mean it will ever equal the speed of light.

This post has been edited by mudderrunner on Nov 1 2010, 06:16 PM

Oh, God ... let's not start this one going again.

That is, unless mudderrunner is trying for a record descent into negative karma!

This post has been edited by NoCleverName on Nov 1 2010, 10:48 PM

I tried answering earlier.
0.9r is 1
It something is not equal to one then it is NOT 0.9r

0.9r is not a process it is a number.
Light travels at light speed it is never less than light speed and 0.9r is never less than 1.

0.9r approaches 1. It is never exactly 1. It is infinitely close to 1, but never will it be 1.

0.9r is a never ending number. 1 is a single digit.