Is math and thus science flawed due to the concept of zero?

Question

Has there ever been a case where someone observed the absence of everything or zero? Growing up I always heard that outer space was a void, meaning it was devoid of anything. Later in life I learned that even in "empty space" there is energy which is why the lowest measurable temperature is some 3 degress above absolute zero (uh oh I just used it). So if we look everywhere and find there's always something even if that something is almost immeasurable, does it make sense to have a concept such as zero in our system of mathmatics? Suppose the concept of zero is a flaw, might it be part of the reason scientist today are unable to unify quantum mechanics and general relativity?

Answer 1

You have erroneously equated the conceptual mathematical zero with the physical zero. They are not equivalent.

A very solid physical object can have a value of zero associated with it.

Zero can mean the total absence of anything in pure mathematics, but in the physical universe, there is no such thing as true zero.

In mathematics, zero and infinity can exist, but not in the natural physical universe.

Zero and infinity can be absolute in mathematics, but in the physical universe they are always relative concepts because they have no physical equivalents. Either extreme can be physically approached as closely as we like, but never actually reached.

All physical processes in nature have a corresponding equation or description that applies over a given range, however it is not mandatory that all equations have a corresponding possible physical process.

In other words, just because a problem can be solved on paper in terms of equations does NOT mean that it represents a physical reality that is also possible. That may or may not be the case. That's one reason we need to do experiments whenever possible.

In the world of mathematics, the stuff of impossible fantasy is identical to the stuff of possible reality. There is no clear dividing line between what is mathematically possible and what is physically possible. The real art lies in telling the difference and it is a very difficult art to master. Even the most brilliant minds often stumble over this important fact by much too readily equating mathematical reality with physical reality.

Space is not strictly equated with zero in physics today. It is something akin to the lowest state of energy - almost, but not exactly zero. It fluctuates, vibrates, stretches and bends depending on the distribution and flow of energy within it. It is a 'quasi-substance' for lack of a better term.

If we wish to define the universe as binding everything together into one unified whole, then we cannot equate space to the absence of anything at all (zero). It must be defined in a way that connects it physically to energy and matter as well. This cannot be done if we equate space with 'absolutely nothing at all' or as total emptiness or void.

Without the concept of zero, many scientific problems could not be solved at all. Zero is a very important concept, so we cannot simply throw zero away unless we have a suitable replacement for it.

Answer 2

Because real world data gathering is almost always flawed, the application of pure Mathematics will give flawed answers. Garbage in, garbage out.

The concept of zero does not cause Math to be flawed. Irrational numbers, negative numbers and imaginary numbers along with standard integers are all representations of reality, but the pure Mathematics is not flawed. It's only the application of the Mathematics that is flawed with is science. This isn't to say that science is unaware of those flaws, but even with the presence of flaws in measurement, it's still be best we can do, and it allows us to achieve things that we couldn't achieve in any other way.

Zero can be accurately represented in real life. I have zero dollars in my wallet. There are zero corvettes in my driveway. I have zero clean clothes to wear.

Zero energy and matter also exists, and must exist between the encreadably small particles within things. Otherwise everything would have an infinate density. EM radiation is composed of photons, which are packets of energy. If you look at the night sky, there is a slight (about 3 dgreess kelvin) temperature everywhere we look, but that temperature is radiated out in the form of photons. Those photons have gaps between them where there is no matter or energy.

I don't believe that anything has been cooled to exactly absolute zero, and it's possible that nothing can, but that doesn't mean that zero doesn't represent a very real concept.

Answer 3

You are saying that things can only be real if epistemologically percieved. An epistemologist would say that something isn't real until he sees it. Zero exists only as a definition. You would probably have an easier time arguing that everything doesn't exist because you can't see time. Zero is just as plausible as infinity or a negative number. You could say that math is all wrong because you've never seen -3 apples, but it's a concept. If you have $3 and you pay me $3, you have no more. You have 0. I don't think that the number zero is the reason quantum mechanics and general relativity are hard to connect. I think it's because the connection right now depends on observing the outcome epistemologically, though.

Answer 4

Number doesn't exist. When you measure out 2 cups of milk, the 2 is not in the milk. The 2 is a thought you have about the milk. Other people have had similar thoughts and drew a line on your measuring cup to indicate when you have 2 cups of milk. The fact that people agree about what volume of milk constitutes 2 cups is irrelevant: the 2 doesn't belong to the milk any more than the 500 in 500 milliliters does.

So not only has no one ever observed 0, no one has ever observed 2 either, or any other number for that matter. Nevertheless, we find numbers useful for science.

If you'd like to know more about zero I recommend you read Charles Seife's book "Zero: The Biography Of A Dangerous Idea."

Answer 5

There is such a thing as zero. For instance, I have zero supermodels with me at this moment.

Perhaps the problem is not zero by infinity. Zero exists. Infinity may not.

Here's a thought. How can we tell if the edge of the universe is expanding at near the speed of light or past the speed of light? If it is past the speed of light, then we would never be able to see the light, correct? So, then we could never directly observe the edge of the universe.

Answer 6

If 10 balls exist, man one has 5 balls, man two has 4 balls, man three has one, ball then how many balls must man four have?

Your rationality to science and math is discredited with logical deduction. Supposedly space is empty or we do not have the means of observing what occupies space. Regardless, zero's in math and the arguement of space being void have no correlation. One is a matter of astro physic's another is a matter of the foundation of math.

Answer 7

First of all, there is a huge difference between mathematics and the other sciences. You cannot say that mathematics is wrong because of something you find in the physical world. Mathematics is a theoretical science and in theory zero exists. If you want to say that science is flawed because there are no examples of nothingness, that is another argument (not a good one IMO, but another one).

Answer 8

You are indeed a flaw.
The rest of zeros are ok.

here's an example - you're got drunk and passed out in the middle of the road, and there is an 18-wheeler semi-trailer track coming down it. Accroding to you theory, even if driver brakes, he can't reduce the speed all the way to zero and you're squished.

Answer 9

Is this a trick question?

Is it possible that you hope to prove that your IQ is not 0?

Sorry, I can't help you to determine if it is or isn't.

Wait. If it is 0, then zero exists. If it isn't 0, then it is 0 because "isn't" signifies the lack of "something" and the lack of "something" is 0.

Answer 10

one of the reasons physicists are having difficulty unifying quantum theory and relativity theory is that relativity theory deals with the very very large, while quantum theory deals with the very very small. a better understanding of gravity is needed.