Talk:0

a number and the numerical digit used to represent that number in numerals

Could somebody add in parentheses succinctly the difference between the terms number, digit and numeral? Secondly, the entry for 1 says "1 (one, also called unit, unity, and (multiplicative) identity) is a number, numeral, and glyph", so the terms are differnt, but do they mean the same as those used here? --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

All these terms are linked (and therefore appear in blue) to articles which explain them. For getting the definitions, it suffices to click on the blue words. On some browsers, it suffices to place the pointer on the word for having the beginning of the linked article in a pop up window. D.Lazard (talk) 17:02, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

citation for Computer science, 2nd paragraph: Java and JDBC indexing

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/nutsandbolts/arrays.html https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/jdbc/basics/retrieving.html#retrieve_rs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.120.67.100 (talk) 10:18, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Value verses digit

It appears that "the number zero" and "the digit zero" are independent inventions, and that quite a few civilizations recognized that zero was a mathematical number, while failing to develop a place-value notation for numbers with a digit zero (other than the symbol used for the number zero). Unfortunately this article acts as though the idea of any kind of zero did not exist until Hindu's invented the *digit* zero. That is incorrect, the idea of a number equal to zero way predated this, even in India. Would it be possible to prehaps split the history into the independent development of the number zero and the digit zero?Spitzak (talk) 16:43, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

If you have sources directly supporting this distinction, why not be WP:BOLD? ;) Paradoctor (talk) 16:46, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Odest recorded use of the zero symbol ?

The page seems to contradict itself?

First: "By AD 150, Ptolemy was using a symbol for zero in his work on mathematical astronomy called the Syntaxis Mathematica, also known as the Almagest."

Then: "A symbol for zero, a large dot likely to be the precursor of the still-current hollow symbol, is used throughout the Bakhshali manuscript, a practical manual on arithmetic for merchants. In 2017 three samples from the manuscript were shown by radiocarbon dating to come from three different centuries: from AD 224–383, AD 680–779, and AD 885–993, making it the world's oldest recorded use of the zero symbol."

How can the Bakhshali manuscript be the oldest if the Almagest predate it by, at least, 1 century?

--Synchronyme (talk) 11:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit: I changed the sentence to "the Indian's oldest recorded use of a zero symbol", those matching the Bakhshali manuscript entrance and making it consistent with the whole page. --Synchronyme (talk) 11:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I believe this is yet another example of confusing "value" and "digit". The need to write something for the number zero is almost entirely unrelated to the need to write something to indicate that a given power of ten does not contribute to a (non-zero) number. This article however refuses to make the distinction and mixes them pretty much at random, with no text trying to disambiguate which one is being talked about.Spitzak (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Newer 2014 Scientific American article

The first #1 reference source is an SA article in 2000s. My searches turn up a newer 2014 article. Does the 2014th have any new research? I don't have access to the scanned printed page.