1111111111<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Is Zero Positive or Negative?	</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative</link>
	<description>&#34;New Math&#34; Homework Support for Gen X Parents</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:27:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Shalena Garza		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-123090</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Shalena Garza]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 18:27:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-123090</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[To determine the &quot;range&quot; between negative 3 and positive 3, the answer is 7, not 6, right?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To determine the &#8220;range&#8221; between negative 3 and positive 3, the answer is 7, not 6, right?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Taha		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-113077</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Taha]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2017 13:54:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-113077</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-91942&quot;&gt;Bon&lt;/a&gt;.

Actually, It was not the language bug but the programming bug.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-91942">Bon</a>.</p>
<p>Actually, It was not the language bug but the programming bug.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: amber		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-111138</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[amber]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2016 12:31:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-111138</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[thanks a lot! it helped me with my homework!!:)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks a lot! it helped me with my homework!!:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: anony		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-110010</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[anony]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Aug 2016 17:16:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-110010</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[hogwash.. floating point has positive and negative zero. CPU&#039;s have the same embedded (since about 486 and before them with co-processor). Your iphony gadget&#039;s hardware and the computerlanguages that it&#039;s software was programmed in have positive and negative floating point zero in them. 
It has nothing to do with old computer languages and the computer languages have nothing to do with the y2k problem. It always is (and has been) programmer/specification limitation/error/misunderstanding!  
And it wasn&#039;t always just &#039;naive&#039; coding either: some parts of code/libs/hardware were never intended to be still running 50 years after they were created, let alone handling mission critical tasks.    
Take this rule to heart: Whenever one tries to solve &#039;magic&#039; by using a lib that does &#039;magic&#039; without having to understand &#039;magic&#039; one ends up with &#039;undefined&#039;.

They aren&#039;t just there for simplifying the machine-math either: A number of mathematical fields/domains (like limits, statistics and some others) NEED a positive and negative 0. They also represent the other end of infinity: the infinitesimals or expressing a mathematical UNDERflow (instead of overflow) due to rounding!  A practical example is if the temperature is some infinitesimal value below 0, then it IS freezing (at -0 after rounding to a desired precision)!

Zero IS a special number but some of it&#039;s properties are culturally/nationally chosen! The subsequent definitions are a result of these fundamental base choices.

In (for example) France and Belgium (including the Dutch speaking part called Flanders AND the German speaking part) the number 0 is &quot;the only number whose polarity attribute is defined to be BOTH positive and negative&quot;. This is NOT just a language thing regarding discrepancies in terminology to describe number-sets. They then add &#039;strict&#039; to positive and negative when the number is not 0. As a result:     
-0 is then the additive inverse of +0
Positive numbers are: &#062;=0
strictly positive numbers are &#062;0
Negative numbers are : &#060;=0
strictly negative numbers are &#060;0
signum function: return +1 for strictly positive numbers; return -1 for strictly negative numbers; otherwise return 0 (or +/-1 depending on mathematical field of usage)
etc...

One might say they are wrong, but as far as they are concerned the rest of the world got it wrong. One might say they are a minority globally and then you correct. However (interesting to note) a growing number of math-users and sites like wikipedia and wikimath are suggesting to add &#039;strictly&#039; to the common positive and negative terminology as it doesn&#039;t conflict with the common &#039;zero has no polarity&#039;-based definitions (and might invite users to wonder &#039;what then are non-strict polarities&#039; to which the answer is: &#039;we don&#039;t have them, but it&#039;s the number 0 in countries like France and Belgium&#039;).

Never forget, mathematics are ONLY a universal language as long as you explicitly and unambiguously DEFINE EVERYTHING you say.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hogwash.. floating point has positive and negative zero. CPU&#8217;s have the same embedded (since about 486 and before them with co-processor). Your iphony gadget&#8217;s hardware and the computerlanguages that it&#8217;s software was programmed in have positive and negative floating point zero in them.<br />
It has nothing to do with old computer languages and the computer languages have nothing to do with the y2k problem. It always is (and has been) programmer/specification limitation/error/misunderstanding!<br />
And it wasn&#8217;t always just &#8216;naive&#8217; coding either: some parts of code/libs/hardware were never intended to be still running 50 years after they were created, let alone handling mission critical tasks.<br />
Take this rule to heart: Whenever one tries to solve &#8216;magic&#8217; by using a lib that does &#8216;magic&#8217; without having to understand &#8216;magic&#8217; one ends up with &#8216;undefined&#8217;.</p>
<p>They aren&#8217;t just there for simplifying the machine-math either: A number of mathematical fields/domains (like limits, statistics and some others) NEED a positive and negative 0. They also represent the other end of infinity: the infinitesimals or expressing a mathematical UNDERflow (instead of overflow) due to rounding!  A practical example is if the temperature is some infinitesimal value below 0, then it IS freezing (at -0 after rounding to a desired precision)!</p>
<p>Zero IS a special number but some of it&#8217;s properties are culturally/nationally chosen! The subsequent definitions are a result of these fundamental base choices.</p>
<p>In (for example) France and Belgium (including the Dutch speaking part called Flanders AND the German speaking part) the number 0 is &#8220;the only number whose polarity attribute is defined to be BOTH positive and negative&#8221;. This is NOT just a language thing regarding discrepancies in terminology to describe number-sets. They then add &#8216;strict&#8217; to positive and negative when the number is not 0. As a result:<br />
-0 is then the additive inverse of +0<br />
Positive numbers are: &gt;=0<br />
strictly positive numbers are &gt;0<br />
Negative numbers are : &lt;=0<br />
strictly negative numbers are &lt;0<br />
signum function: return +1 for strictly positive numbers; return -1 for strictly negative numbers; otherwise return 0 (or +/-1 depending on mathematical field of usage)<br />
etc&#8230;</p>
<p>One might say they are wrong, but as far as they are concerned the rest of the world got it wrong. One might say they are a minority globally and then you correct. However (interesting to note) a growing number of math-users and sites like wikipedia and wikimath are suggesting to add &#039;strictly&#039; to the common positive and negative terminology as it doesn&#039;t conflict with the common &#039;zero has no polarity&#039;-based definitions (and might invite users to wonder &#039;what then are non-strict polarities&#039; to which the answer is: &#039;we don&#039;t have them, but it&#039;s the number 0 in countries like France and Belgium&#039;).</p>
<p>Never forget, mathematics are ONLY a universal language as long as you explicitly and unambiguously DEFINE EVERYTHING you say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bon		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-99348</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Dec 2015 17:02:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-99348</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-99312&quot;&gt;Anon&lt;/a&gt;.

I can see that. Thanks for stopping by!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-99312">Anon</a>.</p>
<p>I can see that. Thanks for stopping by!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Anon		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-99312</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Anon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2015 18:15:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-99312</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Well I guess that it is neither but it is hard to get it and hard to imagine]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well I guess that it is neither but it is hard to get it and hard to imagine</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Bon		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-91942</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2015 09:01:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-91942</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-90944&quot;&gt;Joshua&lt;/a&gt;.

Good point, Joshua!

And those are the same old languages that had the Y2K problem. :D]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-90944">Joshua</a>.</p>
<p>Good point, Joshua!</p>
<p>And those are the same old languages that had the Y2K problem. 😀</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Joshua		</title>
		<link>http://mathfour.com/arithmetic/is-zero-positive-or-negative#comment-90944</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Joshua]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:54:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mathfour.com/?p=1540#comment-90944</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In some old computer programming languages zero could be positive or negative depending on which way you approached it.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In some old computer programming languages zero could be positive or negative depending on which way you approached it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>