In mathematics:
1 minus 1 equals zero
1 apple minus 1 apple equals zero
In physics:
1 apple minus 1 apple cannot equal zero, because it’s impossible for two apples to be identical.
It seems like in physics, zero should be defined as the limit that two objects can be identical. Maybe the Planck length?
An apple isn’t a unit in anything - physics or maths. It’s a fruit. If you decide it’s OK to treat apples as units, then you have accepted that their differences don’t matter.
But 1 apple minus 1 apple IS zero, because you’re not just taking away an apple that’s the same size as the original; the original apple is the apple you’re taking away. And every object is, if nothing else, identical to itself.
There are also some objects, such as electrons, that really are all perfectly identical.
However, zero apples is the same thing as zero oranges
I understand the concept of zero in maths. I don’t understand the concept of zero in physics. I like to read links.
Countable objects like apples are treated singluarly. It’s a little more clear if you can use something more conceptual like dollars.
Yeah there are lots of cases where you end up in real zero in phyics. E.g. electron positron annihilation (as poster above points out electrons, unlike apples are considered interchangable, so after the electron-positron collision you have zero particles):
The zero of mathematics is used in physics - it’s not completely separate - the zero velocity value of a non-moving object is a mathematical zero in the sense that you can add values to it, multiply it with other properties such as mass to get the momentum - and when the velocity is zero, multiplying it in this way works the same as it does in maths, because it is maths
I don’t see a difference either. 2 grams - 2 grams is 0 grams. You can verify this by experiment on a scale.
As Chronos said it’s the same if you have an apple on the scale, and then remove it.
You may be imagining a balancing scale with two different apples, and noting that they are not equal weight. But you would be wrong to write,
The correct interpretation is
~Max
What’s an example of zero in physics that you don’t understand? “1 apple minus 1 apple” is not a physics equation will well defined meaning, so it seems your starting with misconceptions about a lot more than zero?
Natural units are based on definitions (e.g. the speed of light equals one). But because it is maths doesn’t mean it accurately describes the natural universe.
I guess you could say that, even if you take away the apple, there will still be little bits left behind? A forensic team could maybe tell that an apple had been present. So, 1 apple - 1 apple = 0.0001 apples?
Maybe that’s what the OP is getting at.
I mean, there’s no such thing as zero velocity, really. It’s velocity relative to something else, and even that might not be exactly zero at the molecular level.
Anyway, just my thoughts about what the OP may mean when asking about zero in physics.
That is to say, removing an apple is only an approximation of subtraction.
~Max
Sure, that works as a possible explanation of what the OP is after.
Is it a spherical apple, or a point apple?
Then again, everything in physics, or at least in the human study of it, is only an approximation.
Not really. Removing an apple is only an approximation of zero.
That makes no sense. Zero isn’t an operation, removal of an object is.
1 apple minus 1 apple does equal zero, but it’s virtually impossible to accurately “minus 1 apple” in real life. Because, as you say, ‘maths don’t accurately describe the universe.’
~Max
I’m having a hard time understanding how to apply the maths concept of zero to physics, given the Uncertainty principle.
I assume any integer or rational number is trouble for you then.