• SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    0 is not a natural number. 0 is a whole number.

    The set of whole numbers is the union of the set of natural numbers and 0.

          • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            An English dictionary is not really going to tell you what mathematicians are doing. Like, its goal is to describe what the word “integer” means (in various contexts), it won’t tell you what the “integer series” is.

            https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/138633/what-are-the-whole-numbers

            The gist I see is that it’s kind of ambiguous whether the whole number series includes negatives or not, and in higher math you won’t see the term without a strict definition. It’s much more likely you’d see “non-negative integers” or the like.

            • Monstera@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              wdym, you know what integers are called in latin languages? “inteiros” (pt), literally “whole”. everyone that does higher math (me included) uses it and understands it for what it is: numbers that are not fractions/irationals.

              Just cause there exists an English hegemony and your language is ill defined and confused with your multiple words for a single concept, that doesn’t mean you get to muddy the waters, rename something in maths, and make a mountain out of a mole hill. Integers include negatives and zero, saying whole numbers and integers is the same, no room for debate

              now excuse me while i go touch some grass

              • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Whoa, whoa, I’m not making this out to be like an imperialism thing. I’m not interested in what people ought to do.

                The link I gave, a comment in there gives examples of papers where the term is being used to mean different things. So, this ambiguity is either something you just have to contend with (people using the term wrong), or you just don’t read from those people. It’s fine. Nobody is coming for you, I promise.

                If I were in your class and you said “the whole numbers” but meant the negatives too, that’d probably give me pause (dumb American), but I have such herculean powers of intuition that I probably wouldn’t even ask you a question about it.

                • Monstera@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  My comment was mostly in jest, it came out all wonky, I shouldnt post sleep deprived :p

                  • petrol_sniff_king@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 months ago

                    Oh, it’s no problem :p

                    I don’t think I’ve seen Etymonline before, so I should thank you for introducing me to it. I do really like etymology, actually.

      • anton@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        I would say that whole numbers and integers are different names for the same thing.

        In german the integers are literally called ganze Zahlen meaning whole numbers.

    • And009@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      This is what we’ve been taught as well. 0 is a whole number, but not a natural number.