Dan Bron wrote: numbers; whenever convenient, it may be assumed that 0 e. P ." > > Due to lack of standard terminology, the following terms and > notations are recommended in preference to "counting number," > "natural number," and "whole number." ... >
The disambiguating terms are what mathematicians normally use. What is a natural number depends on context. I would favor including 0. Whether zero is included in the natural numbers is a similar argument as to whether 1 is a prime. > If I were God-King, I would mandate "natural numbers" indicate the > positive integers, whole numbers are the integers, and would > prohibit the use of the term "counting numbers". "Counting numbers" suggests cardinal numbers, which certainly include 0, but a lot more than the integers. "Whole numbers" implies that the integers are embedded in the rational numbers, which is by no means necessary. Best wishes, John Randall ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
