Quote:
Originally Posted by GnosticTarotCards
"As for this atout, we number it zero, though it is placed it in the order of cards after the twentyfirst, because it does not count when it is alone, and possesses ontly the value that it gives to the others, precisely like our zero: showing thus that nothing exists without its folly."......

Precisely like our zero? Total rubbish! It has no more validity than his Egyptian origin theory.
Zero counts the number of elements in the null set, and it is the additive identity in our number system. Among other things, it tells us when we are no longer "in the red" with an account. Since we use a positional number system, it is convenient that zero can be used as a place holder for powers of 10, but this has
nothing to do with its property as the unique integer between 1 and +1: 1 < 0 < +1, or its algebraic properties: a + 0 = 0 + a = a, a x 0 = 0 x a = 0, and (+a) + (a) = (a) + (+a) = 0. Moreover, it is the
first nonnegative integer: 0 < 1 < 2 < .... It is indispensible as a fullfledged number in all branches of mathematics. It is, however, deprived of one right shared by all other nonzero numbers: it may not be used as a divisor. But why would anyone in their right mind want to use zero as a divisor anyhow?