Craig Gibson wrote: > Hi all > > I just had a thought... a rare event ;) > > When did the concept of '0' actually start? Ancient > mathematicians surely could not have worked without it, yet there > is no 0 in roman numerals for example... > > A little off topic I suppose but maybe one of you 'brainies' have the > answer...
Yet, they did. Zero, as a "counting" number is a very recent introduction to mankind. The "empty" set was quite troublesome for ancient mathematicians. And so was the negative numbers, the concept of limit and many other things that seem quite "natural" to us. Some decades ago I read a book by Bertrand Rusell in which the "zero" issue is discussed. Interesting as the book was, I can't remember all the details. The title -- I think -- is "The Philosophy of Mathematics". In fact I can't even remember if I read it in Portuguese or in English so the above title could be its Portuguese version, I don't know. As far as I can remember, he discusses the issue from a logical and philosophical perspective. There is another book that discusses the same issues from a historical point-of-view. I think the title is "The History of Mathematics". I can't remember the author's name. What I remember is that when I read it I was quite surprised to find how recent the discovery (and usage) of zero was. Also, I can remember, when I studied the Greek Philosophers, how Archimedes was troubled by some of his findings. For instance, he knew how to calculate the area of a figure using the "exhaustion" method. He refused to accept it himself. The method was re-discovered and perfect by (please, put any pointy object down) Newton and Leibnitz (no wars, please!) Zero, infinite, empty set, complex numbers were all "hard to accept" concepts. Now, on the funny side: can you imagine a Roman administrator doing complex tax calculations and preparing the budget for the next year using those Roman numerals? What a scene! - fernando PS - Unfortunately it does not seem my RAM memory can keep information for decades. Eventually things fade away, no matter how important I think the issues are. I should have time to visit a library and refresh my memory. > > > Kind Regards > Craig Gibson > > > It is difficult to say that there is no year 0. If we are to look at the > > Time Line it should appear as > > > > <(2000BC)--------------------(1BC)0(1AD)---------------------(2000AD)> > > > > >From a mathamatical perspective, there should be a 0 between BC (Negative > > numbers) and AD (Positive numbers). If such is the case, then 0 can be taken > > as 0AD or 0BC (Both mening the same). Thus year 2000 is 2000 Years after > > 1/1/0000 and is the new millinium. > > > > I have not come across any historic record to prove the above right or > > wrong. But if anyone has any information, please let me know. > > > > -- Fernando Cabral Padrao iX Sistemas Abertos mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.pix.com.br Fone Direto: +55 61 329-0206 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] PABX: +55 61 329-0202 Fax: +55 61 326-3082 15º 45' 04.9" S 47º 49' 58.6" W 19º 37' 57.0" S 45º 17' 13.6" W
