Is midnight today or tomorrow?

Discussion in 'Science & Society' started by dsdsds, Mar 11, 2009.

  1. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,740
    Zero 0 is an EVEN number which lies between -1 and 1

    This was stated on QI but sorry unable to give a more exact reference

    But Google gives up the following Wiki

    Why zero is even

    The standard definition of "even number" can be used to directly prove that zero is even. A number is called "even" if it is an integer multiple of 2. As an example, the reason that 10 is even is that it equals 5 × 2. In the same way, zero is an integer multiple of 2, namely 0 × 2, so zero is even

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parity_of_zero

    Unless my eyes deceive me (or my glasses - I'm due a new pair in 2 months) I detect a 0 between -1 and 1 in the line image from the referenced article

    Hope this helps all

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,641
    I corrected your "correction". If you still don't understand, it seems that everybody else does.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,771
    ^^^
    That's funny. I was giving you the benefit of doubt among other benefits.

    <>
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,771
    ^^^
    I definitely understand.

    <>
     
  8. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,752
    SiaSL: you have now posted 6 responses in a row that are entirely evasive (did you think we wouldn't notice?)
    You made at least one assertion among others - that nothing exists between 1 and -1.
    Several people have questioned what you mean by this, since it is demonstrably false. But we gave you plenty benefit of the doubt - and plenty of opportunity to correct/clarify.

    Yet you have offered no clarification in any subsequent posts, except to assert (falsely) that you've tried to explain.

    At this point, we are justified in interpreting your evasiveness as 'I said a dumb thing, and now I don't know how to retract it.' Let's just leave it at that and move on.
     
  9. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,771
    ^^^
    I have only countered ridiculous assumptions that I am confused & do not understand. That is not evasive. Neither is telling you there is nothing more to say. I had my say & others have had their say including repeating several things. It is obvious neither will convince the other.
    A person should be able to stop discussing something without undue assumptions being made. I have often been tempted to stop a discussion with you.
    "I tried my best to explain it to you." was to sideshowbob about what we were discussing & it was not false. It is quite foolish for someone else to claim they know I did not try my best to explain.
    No. That is not justified but you believe whatever helps you.
    I am obviously trying to move on. I do not care much for bantering with the devil or his advocate. I have no idea whether you are serious & at this point, I do not care.

    <>
     
  10. Dinosaur Rational Skeptic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,515
    I find it incredible that this Thread now has 166 Posts (not including mine).

    I have only read a few. I can find more interesting issues on which to waste time.
     
  11. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,641
    And yet you have time to waste telling us that you have no time to waste.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    In my 73 years of observation, I have found that when a clock reaches 12:00, the time is said to be 12:00 a.m. This, therefore, is the first second of the new day, not the last second of the previous day.

    Computers have institutionalized this, since today, most clocks are electronic and cannot be re-set easily, if at all.

    -- Fraggle Rocker -- Yes, I'm still waiting for my Moderator status to be repaired.
     
  13. Tralay Registered Member

    Messages:
    4
    12:00 is midnight, which is not really 12:00 in engineer's terms, so it really doesn't exist since the longer the decimal, the farther away from it's actual meaning it gets an the further away, the smaller it gets. Plus, it never really is midnight anyways since time is congruant and doesn't really split up into sectors.
     
  14. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,752
    12:00 is a zero-duration event.

    You're referring to the first second after 12:00.

    Here's a logical argument that shows your idea can't be right:

    Why did you pick a second for the duration of the time you call 12:00?
    Why not a minute, and hour or a microsecond?

    12:00 can just as easily refer to the first minute after midnight, 12:00 can also be the first hour. Or the first nanosecond. How could such a broad and arbitrary array of durations all be referred to by the same label?

    No. 12:00 must be a zero duration event - before the first second - before the first nanosecond of the new day.
     
    Last edited: Jul 23, 2017 at 10:31 PM

Share This Page