For a guy so knowledgeable about so many things, you sure miss the basics sometimes.

In mathematics the number 0 is still treated as an object. Regardless if we choose to represent '0' by a null set or not, the number is still an object. That object requires a reference. This is why set theory is so helpful because not only can it represent mathematical equations, but it can also represent things of the world.

For example, if I have a collection of n rocks (equals set(rocks, n)), and I subtract n from the collection, then I have set(rocks, 0) or null set of rocks.

This is about as basic as I can make this. I wish I could do more, but how can I do more if you won't even accept the tenets of set theory (mathematics)?

Warm regards, Harv

• Incorrect, null (zero) is more basic than a null set. - alexander - November 8, 2001 - 22:51 UTC