Science Memes

11189 readers

3294 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.

Rules

Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
Keep it rooted (on topic).
No spam.
Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.

Research Committee

[email protected]

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

836

Zero to hero (mander.xyz)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

134 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 84 points 6 months ago (25 children)

I just found out about this debate and it's patently absurd. The ISO 80000-2 standard defines ℕ as including 0 and it's foundational in basically all of mathematics and computer science. Excluding 0 is a fringe position and shouldn't be taken seriously.

[–] RandomWalker 39 points 6 months ago (5 children)

I could be completely wrong, but I doubt any of my (US) professors would reference an ISO definition, and may not even know it exists. Mathematicians in my experience are far less concerned about the terminology or symbols used to describe something as long as they’re clearly defined. In fact, they’ll probably make up their own symbology just because it’s slightly more convenient for their proof.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

My experience (bachelor's in math and physics, but I went into physics) is that if you want to be clear about including zero or not you add a subscript or superscript to specify. For non-negative integers you add a subscript zero (ℕ_0). For strictly positive natural numbers you can either do ℕ_1 or ℕ^+.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

I hate those guys. I had that one prof at uni and he reinvented every possible symbol and everything was so different. It was a pita to learn from external material.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

they’ll probably make up their own symbology just because it’s slightly more convenient for their proof

I feel so thoroughly called out RN. 😂

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

From what i understand, you can pay iso to standardise anything. So it's only useful for interoperability.

[–] KISSmyOSFeddit 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Can I pay them to make my dick length the ISO standard?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

I feel they have an image to maintain, but i also feel they would sell out for enough money. So.. tell me if you make it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, interoperability. Like every software implementation of natural numbers that include 0.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

How programmers utilize something doesn't mean it's the mathematical standard, idk why ISO would be a reference for this at all

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Because ISO is the International Organisation for Standardization

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago

Yes, but it's not for mathematicians. It's for the applied fields.

[–] xkforce 1 points 6 months ago

Yeah dont do that.

load more comments (19 replies)