numbers paradox

because when you take the definition of "going into something", you can't go into it negative times... you either go into it or not. That's like going negative miles per hour (NOT BACKWARDS) you can't go negative mph or km/h but it's an idea, isn't it?

Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose
how many times does 3 go into -3?

some of you might say it goes in to it -1 times, but how can you go into something -1 times? you either go into it (1+) or not (0)

The answer to your question. -3/3=-1 (If a debt of $3 is devided equally by three people they all ow $1 therefor their balance is -1)

But if I correctly understand the intention of your post. It might have been better to ask the root of -3.

Originally posted by Bowmann
I have no apples on my head. Are you saying I'm wrong?

No then you are correct. But only if you are stating that you have NO aplles on your head. If your stating that you have 0 aplles on your head. then you are talking nonsense.

For example. Stating you have no planes on your head is correct. Stating you have 0 planes on your head doesn't make sense.

Another one, would you state that you have no trees in your blood, or would you state you have 0 trees in your blood?

Offcourse no trees. 0 doesn't make sense because you are really not stating a volume. 0 is NOT a volume. If you are confused by this, please consult a mathteacher. I don't know a better way to explain.

Originally posted by Siebren
But if I correctly understand the intention of your post. It might have been better to ask the root of -3.

Oh that's easy. (3^.5)i.

Originally posted by Siebren
No then you are correct. But only if you are stating that you have NO aplles on your head. If your stating that you have 0 aplles on your head. then you are talking nonsense.

For example. Stating you have no planes on your head is correct. Stating you have 0 planes on your head doesn't make sense.

Another one, would you state that you have no trees in ...[text shortened]... you are confused by this, please consult a mathteacher. I don't know a better way to explain.

While it's true that I have no NO trees in my blood, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong in substituting the value "0".


I have 0 trees in my blood.

I have 0 chimneys up my nose.

I have -1 left arms connected to my right shoulder.

And so on.


Feel free to consult a maths teacher yourself, whilst I consult my psychologist.

Originally posted by Bowmann
Oh that's easy. (3^.5)i.

where'd the .5 come from?

Originally posted by Bowmann
While it's true that I have no NO trees in my blood, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong in substituting the value "0".


I have 0 trees in my blood.

I have 0 chimneys up my nose.

I have -1 left arms connected to my right shoulder.

And so on.


Feel free to consult a maths teacher yourself, whilst I consult my psychologist.

-1 left arms.

hmmzzs, In that case do I have -1 vagina's ? (I 'm male)

I'm confused now 🙄

🙄 me too... how can you TELL if you have -1 vaginas?

Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose
🙄 me too... how can you TELL if you have -1 vaginas?

When I'm getting desperate? 😀

Originally posted by Siebren
-1 left arms.

hmmzzs, In that case do I have -1 vagina's ? (I 'm male)

I'm confused now 🙄

No. You have 0.

-3 DIVIDED BY 3 equals -1.

My calculator and I know what 'divided by' is, mathematically speaking. Because 3 * -1 = -3, it's pretty simple to reverse the process.

I don't know a mathematical operation called "go into", unless you mean that one. Just because you're trying to define it by words and then using the logic of the physical world, you're making an issue out of a very simple mathematical sum.

Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose
because when you take the definition of "going into something", you can't go into it negative times... you either go into it or not. That's like going negative miles per hour (NOT BACKWARDS) you can't go negative mph or km/h but it's an idea, isn't it?

What's wrong with defining backwards as negative? Ever looked at a measuring line with zero in the middle? All the positive numbers are on one side, and the negative numbers are on the other. Direction is important.

Honestly, this whole 'paradox' depends on your methods of definition.

Originally posted by orfeo
Just because you're trying to define it by words and then using the logic of the physical world, you're making an issue out of a very simple mathematical sum.

I bet they still won't get it.

Originally posted by Bowmann
I bet they still won't get it.

Care to put a little wager on that? Say, 0 dollars? Wait, let me check my wallet...OK, I have that. 0 dollars it is.

Originally posted by PBE6
Care to put a little wager on that? Say, 0 dollars? Wait, let me check my wallet...OK, I have that. 0 dollars it is.

No. I'll bet -£100 that I'm wrong.