> If you give something a value, this value has to be related to some other
> value to have any meaning. So if you say the speed of light is c then the
> value assigned to c has to be in relation to some other value. By
> mathematical definition this value is 0 unless otherwise stated.
Whose definition - yours? To get the number of units a quantity has you
divide the size of the unit into the quantity - now something divided by
zero is - you guessed it - the size of the vacuum in your brain.
Bill
> If c is a
> real value and assigned to a real effect then 0 must be a real value and
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
> ah.{:-)
*** rD - 29 May 2005 13:49 GMT
| > If you give something a value, this value has to be related to some other
| > value to have any meaning. So if you say the speed of light is c then the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
|
| Bill
I had assumed that you would have derived the unit value and was referring
to either the assigned value or the unit value.
So by your method you know have a value again but your unit value 1 still
has to be related to something. By your method you seem to start counting
from 1, so 2 = 1 count and you reference everything to 1?
BTW Bill you totally missed the point, that being that
to count anything you have to start somewhere. I think I prefer my vacuum
than your stone Bill. {:-) Stone is derived from vacuum by a process of
ossification.
| > If c is a
| > real value and assigned to a real effect then 0 must be a real value and
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
| > Maybe updates. The spuds, beans and onions are coming up nicely. Ooh
| > ah.{:-)