When can Zer0 + Zer0 = 0ne?

Howdy peeps,

eYe recently ran across a Youtube video that starts off with:

0 + 0 = 1



Is it possible for Zer0 + Zer0 to equal One?

What dew you think and why?

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


It´s a hoax.

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

It´s a hoax.

But what if it's a Conspiracy Theory hoax?

And the Conspiracy is real?

Is it possible you've been mathematically lied to your entire lives?

If you can't see the fnord, it can't eat you . . .

Ribbit

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


maybe the poster of the video is implying that the fact that there is the possibility of there being two "nothings" in one place, could only mean that there would be "something" there to distinguish the two "nothings" between each other?


edit: example: a line drawn down the middle of a blank piece of paper.

reply to post by SoymilkAlaska


i was going to argue that 0 isnt a number, but a place holder but woah you just blew my mind SmA

Originally posted by SoymilkAlaska
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

maybe the poster of the video is implying that the fact that there is the possibility of there being two "nothings" in one place, could only mean that there would be "something" there to distinguish the two "nothings" between each other?

example: a line drawn down the middle of a blank piece of paper.

Good point!

Let's look at the equation:

0 "+" 0 = One

What's between both Zero's is a "+" sign, sew what could that sign symbolize, to turn the two Zero's into One sumthing?

But then, what could those two Zero's possibly symbolize?

Ribbit

Ps: What distinguishes between one Zero and another Zero, but the second Zero is turned inside-out or outside-in? Would they kNot look the same? But would they still be the same?

If one Zero is Half of the other Zero and likewise, would that kNot solve the equation?

The fibonacci sequence.

Still not sure how the 1 is originally formed though....

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by SoymilkAlaska
reply to post by ButtUglyToad

 

maybe the poster of the video is implying that the fact that there is the possibility of there being two "nothings" in one place, could only mean that there would be "something" there to distinguish the two "nothings" between each other?

example: a line drawn down the middle of a blank piece of paper.

Good point!

Let's look at the equation:

0 "+" 0 = One

What's between both Zero's is a "+" sign, sew what could that sign symbolize, to turn the two Zero's into One sumthing?

But then, what could those two Zero's possibly symbolize?

Ribbit

edit on 24-2-2012 by ButtUglyToad because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by TheGuyFawkes
reply to post by SoymilkAlaska

 

i was going to argue that 0 isnt a number, but a place holder but woah you just blew my mind SmA

^_^

editing soon maybe, am going to think a bit.


edit: at first i pictured two clear gasses in my mind, like nitrogen and oxygen, you can't see between them...

then i pictured water and oil. they don't mix?

there's that little place between the surfaces.

there's the inside of the apple, that you can't see by cutting it in half.

Crap math sounds like a new branch of numerology.

Numbers of the Tarot.

"Zero" is a relative place-holder. Absolute non-existence (true zero) is self-annihilating upon recognition or consideration by any consciousness. Because of this, and Omnipresence cannot be true to Its own definition of existing absolutely everywhere, the Universe needed to be created so that relative non-existence (zero) can exist and Omniscient consciousness can possess it through finite proxies, namely, us.

Unless 0 somehow magically equals 0.5, then no.

Originally posted by mr-lizard
The fibonacci sequence.

Still not sure how the 1 is originally formed though....

I noticed that too, fibonacci.
I don't remember it starting out as 0 + 0 though, but starts as 1, 1, 2.....

Originally posted by circlemaker
Unless 0 somehow magically equals 0.5, then no.

And why would magic have to be involved?

Ribbit

Originally posted by tkwasny
"Zero" is a relative place-holder. Absolute non-existence (true zero) is self-annihilating upon recognition or consideration by any consciousness. Because of this, and Omnipresence cannot be true to Its own definition of existing absolutely everywhere, the Universe needed to be created so that relative non-existence (zero) can exist and Omniscient consciousness can possess it through finite proxies, namely, us.

Possessing zero is the reason why the Universe exists. The Silence.

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by circlemaker
Unless 0 somehow magically equals 0.5, then no.

And why would magic have to be involved?

Ribbit

Because it goes well with sarcasm.

zero + zero = one zero

There.

Originally posted by tkwasny
"Zero" is a relative place-holder. Absolute non-existence (true zero) is self-annihilating upon recognition or consideration by any consciousness. Because of this, and Omnipresence cannot be true to Its own definition of existing absolutely everywhere, the Universe needed to be created so that relative non-existence (zero) can exist and Omniscient consciousness can possess it through finite proxies, namely, us.

That is true of Zero, but what of Double Zero? Double Ought?

Would kNot the implosion of 00 be the creation of Everything?

The creation of the One?

Ribbit

I've heard of 0^0=1

but never 0+0=1

Goofy.

eta> The First Two comments on Youtube pretty much sum up this vid (pun intended).

reply to post by ButtUglyToad


I don't even...

What?

Really, I thought it needed sound to understand it so I got some ear buds. No sound. No explanation as to why he wrote "0 + 0 = 1".

Am I really this dense? Am I missing something?

Originally posted by FugitiveSoul
I've heard of 0^0=1

but never 0+0=1

Goofy.

eta> The First Two comments on Youtube pretty much sum up this vid (pun intended).

eYe've never heard that before.

But it goes inline with Double Ought.

Zero x Zero = 00 = 0^0 = One

With that, then:

Zero + Zero = 00 = 0^0 = One

Ribbit

Originally posted by ButtUglyToad

Originally posted by tkwasny
"Zero" is a relative place-holder. Absolute non-existence (true zero) is self-annihilating upon recognition or consideration by any consciousness. Because of this, and Omnipresence cannot be true to Its own definition of existing absolutely everywhere, the Universe needed to be created so that relative non-existence (zero) can exist and Omniscient consciousness can possess it through finite proxies, namely, us.

That is true of Zero, but what of Double Zero? Double Ought?

Would kNot the implosion of 00 be the creation of Everything?

The creation of the One?

Ribbit

edit on 24-2-2012 by ButtUglyToad because: (no reason given)

The infinite division, as a spherical geometric strike of effort, by omniscience in the attempt to occupy absolute non-existence is the cause for the Singularity existing. A structure composed of infinite kinetic Mind trying to occupy absolute non-existence with Itself.

It IS the infinite spherical implosion in the effort toward zero. Spherical division/subtraction.