1168
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] wellbuddyweek@lemm.ee 85 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Actually, those are not the same. Natural numbers include zero, positive integers do not. She shoud definately use 'big naturals'.

Edit: although you could argue that it doesnt matter as 0 is arguably neither big nor large

[-] yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de 67 points 10 months ago

Natural numbers only include zero if you define it so in the beginning of your book/paper/whatever. Otherwise it's ambiguous and you should be ashamed of yourself.

[-] wellbuddyweek@lemm.ee 8 points 10 months ago

Fair enough, as a computer scientist I got tought to use the Neumann definition, which includes zero, unless stated differently by the author. But for general mathematics, I guess it's used both ways.

[-] Zwiebel@feddit.org 49 points 10 months ago

Natural numbers include zero

That is a divisive opinion and not actually a fact

[-] kogasa@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago

Yeah, it's a matter of convention rather than opinion really, but among US academia the convention is to exclude 0 from the naturals. I think in France they include it.

[-] SchwertImStein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 10 months ago

positive interers with addition are not a monoid though, since the identity element of addition is 0

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] errer@lemmy.world 31 points 10 months ago

Big naturals in fact include two zeroes:

(o ) ( o)

Spaces and parens added for clarity

[-] Jerkface@lemmy.world 20 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

(0 ) ( 0)
You can't fool me.

[-] Quadhammer@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

(o Y o) solve for Y

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] peregrin5@lemm.ee 13 points 10 months ago

Depends on how you draw it.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Atlusb@lemmy.world 48 points 10 months ago

Also in an aqueous environment, they become floating point values.

[-] hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 10 months ago

Gandalf's large positive integers

Like that?

[-] weird@sub.wetshaving.social 13 points 10 months ago

Oh wow. Do we have a lemmy community for that?

[-] gay_sex@mander.xyz 10 points 10 months ago

be the change you want to see!

[-] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 22 points 10 months ago

Large nonnegative numbers*

[-] Tenkard@lemmy.ml 18 points 10 months ago

If they're big the zero is skipped anyway

[-] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

Just write it bigger.

[-] jxk@sh.itjust.works 7 points 10 months ago

Thanks for the comment - - I will fight for recognizing zero as a natural number

[-] BuboScandiacus@mander.xyz 4 points 10 months ago

In mathematics, the natural numbers are the numbers 0, 1, 2, 3, and so on, possibly excluding 0.[1] Some start counting with 0, defining the natural numbers as the non-negative integers 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., while others start with 1, defining them as the positive integers 1, 2, 3, ... .[a] Some authors acknowledge both definitions whenever convenient.[2] Sometimes, the whole numbers are the natural numbers as well as zero. In other cases, the whole numbers refer to all of the integers, including negative integers.[3] The counting numbers are another term for the natural numbers, particularly in primary education, and are ambiguous as well although typically start at 1.

Sauce

So it is undefined behavior, great

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] miss_demeanour@lemmy.dbzer0.com 22 points 10 months ago

Big Naturals Are More Pronounced

ftfy

[-] usualsuspect191@lemmy.ca 18 points 10 months ago

I don't care if they're big, as long as they're real

[-] southsamurai@sh.itjust.works 11 points 10 months ago

I don't care if they're real, as long as I can manipulate them

[-] driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br 7 points 10 months ago

They're Real, and they're fantastic.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago

You like big figures and you cannot lie?

[-] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 4 points 10 months ago

Imaginary ones are useful too.

[-] AngularViscosity@piefed.social 18 points 10 months ago

Don't get me started on the unnatural and supernatural numbers.

[-] Lifter@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 10 months ago

Sound made up, like imaginary numbers.

[-] Jankatarch@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I mean all numbers are made up when you think about it.

Also unrelated but natural numbers are closed under multiplication (by pure coincidence) while imaginary numbers are not.

This means natural numbers make worse examples when learning about sets.

[-] deltapi@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Made me think of how everything is base 10, even octal or binary.

[-] Bosht@lemmy.world 15 points 10 months ago

This actually got a chuckle out of me. Prob the first number related joke I've laughed at.

[-] zjti8eit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 10 months ago

I like naturals, but more than a mouthful is kind of a waste. ;-)

[-] Jerb322@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

https://youtu.be/B8dldLG_ZhI

"Anything bigger than a handful, you're risking a sprained tung"

[-] Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 10 months ago

That's true OP, "big naturals" are indeed very pronounced.

[-] regdog@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago

I googled "Big Naturals". Result number 16 was this:

[-] xeekei@lemmy.zip 8 points 10 months ago

Should've been number 1.

[-] ATS1312@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 10 months ago

Natural Numbers ≠ Integers though.

In spite of that, I'm chuckling. Math can be funny sometimes 😂

[-] MBM@lemmings.world 18 points 10 months ago

Positive integers are (a subset of) natural numbers

[-] ewenak@jlai.lu 5 points 10 months ago

Why a subset? They're the same thing right? I guess it could be about the zero?

[-] SchwertImStein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 10 months ago

you answered your own question

[-] ewenak@jlai.lu 3 points 10 months ago

Well what I learned in school was that zero was both positive and negative. I knew some people consider the natural numbers don't include zero, but I didn't know for some zero isn't even positive.

[-] SchwertImStein@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

it is neither positive nor negative

[-] deltapi@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I knew a physicist who considered 0 negative if she arrived at 0 coming from negative source numbers and positive if coming from positive sources.

Something something sampling rate

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

I just say “big’uns”

[-] isekaihero@ani.social 6 points 10 months ago

big badonka-donkadonks

[-] Ledericas@lemm.ee 5 points 10 months ago

we like to see those Double negative intergers.

[-] kamen@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months ago

Why, would anyone at all think about something else?

/s

[-] psx_crab@lemmy.zip 3 points 10 months ago

Be glad it isn't Positive Integers Venti

[-] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 3 points 10 months ago
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2025
1168 points (99.2% liked)

memes

20814 readers
1642 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/Ads/AI SlopNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS