# Basic Math Question

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/basic-math-question/528431>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [February 10, 2010, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/basic-math-question/528431 "2010-02-10T16:00:38Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\
**Post date:** [February 11, 2010, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/basic-math-question/528431/41 "2010-02-11T15:08:48Z")

</div>

> [@Jinx](#):
>
> If the book is right, then there IS no such thing as -3, or any negative values, on a numberline. Or, at best, the numberline is only trying to show relative position, but not unique numbers. In other words, the 3 to the left of the zero is not unique from the 3 to the right of zero. Yet, math will contradict itself by claiming that -3 \< 3. They can’t have it both ways!!!
> 
> Also, if math rules claim it is proper to parse the negative from the three (in my exmaple), that is like saying Jonathan is a really guy named Jo Nathan. That’s simply BS. I fail to see why the “integrity” of -3 is not maintained as a distinct number unto itself.

You know.

Germany may have it right after all.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/basic-math-question/528431.md?page=2)