The reason this wasn't simply answered was because of the way the question was asked. If you ask someone in conditions where they're expecting a trick answer they'll fall over themselves even if the answer is actually very simple or known to you already.
MaskofFayt But if they actually knew the whole particular topic, these trick questions wouldnt affect them at all. The show therefore promotes active knowledge and tries to punish baseless intuitive answers that they couldnt even defend properly. I think thats brilliant.
It's almost a rule now that Phil should be on the Christmas episode and by God, I love them for it. He is always brilliant. Thank you for sharing this bit :D
Daniel-Joseph Griffin best let people think you're an idiot without opening you mouth and proving it. Obviously know all the answers to question after the event.
To be perfectly fair, 0 and to a lesser extent 1 have unique properties that make them stand out to other numbers. So the answer may not be as obvious as the math elves think.
@@GGov86 it doesn't: it does not have _two_ integer divisors, only one also, if 1 were prime, it would no longer allow the rule 'each integer is either a prime or a unique product of primes' if 1 were prime, it would result in an infinite possibility of prodcuts, i.e. what it is now times an infinite possibility of powers of 1, e.g. 6 = 2*3 = 2*3*1 = 2*3*1*1 = ...
Zero is an even number. It exists in the same way that every other number exists - however that may be; and the reason that it is even is because it has the form 2n rather than 2n + 1. 1 is odd: it has the form 2n + 1, where n is 0. 2 x 0 = 0, 0 + 1 = 1. Ergo 1 is odd. 3 is odd: it has the form 2n + 1, where n is 1. 2 x 1 = 2, 2 + 1 = 3. Ergo, 3 is odd. 2 is even: it has the form 2n, where n = 1. 2 x 1 = 2. There is nothing to add. 2 is therefore, even. 0 is even. It has the form 2n, where n = 0. 2 x 0 = 0. Since there is nothing to add, 0 is even. This is fucking elementary number theory.
It is only a number in the abstract. Numbers are only there to represent quantity and if you have none of a thing, there is no way to physically represent no-thing. Therefore zero is neither even nor a number
MichaelKingsfordGray Not at all. Obviously you can choose to count using negative numbers. But it's only symbols - neither negative numbers nor zero exist in reality.
And besides I don't believe in debt. I would either gift you the money or not. I wouldn't expect it back. That's the great evil of counting with negative numbers - that we can put our fellow human beings into debt
Anthony Peterson Positive numbers don't "exist" either. Numbers are a theoretical construct. Natural numbers are just easier to visualize/can be used to model more basic things. But 4 per se does not "exist" any more than 0, -2 or π.
Because it is an easy question...for people who understand that zero IS a number. The problem is that most people probably think zero is just a placeholder and nothing more.
Matthew Gavin Well ignoring my sarcasm for a moment, I can easily empathize with Phil because the "elves" love to intentionally ask questions that SHOULD have obvious answers only to try to find obscure answers and use the "obvious" one as a trap. Perfect example is when they asked "How many moons does the earth have?" And the obvious answer, ONE, was a trap answer. Their justification for this was the existence of 3753 Cruithne, with is a semi orbital celestial body that actually orbits the sun but earth's orbit directly impacts it whenever they align. TECHNICALLY the elves weren't right, but they used the fact that while it ISN'T a moon it can be qualified as a semi constant SATELLITE to justify saying that we have ONE moon is an incorrect answer. And they do this ALL.THE.TIME. So of course when the obvious answer that zero is an even number (it has to be even or odd, right?) comes to everyone's mind, the contestants usually become apprehensive because they know chances are the elves have found the loophole that makes this line of obvious reasoning false. There's no such thing as an "easy" question on QI. Not in the traditional sense. Not the way their researchers run it.
Yes, it is an easy question. You just need to apply reason and logic. And the same thing with the earth having more than one moon. Given that most planets which have moons have more than one, it's not too weird for the earth to be the same.
Matthew Gavin Actually the POINT I was making is that they love using technicalities. The earth actually DOES only have one moon. It has MORE than one satellite and semi orbital celestial body, which is not the same thing. But they still decided that asking the question "How many moons does the earth have" would yield an incorrect answer unless the participant said, "Technically one moon, however we also have a 'semi moon' in the form of this celestial body." That's NOT a simple matter of the application of logic and reason; that's subjective standards applied for the sake of absurdity in academia, and once again it illustrates why questions are rarely straightforward enough on this show to be given a label like "easy" or "hard".
0 is even but it isn't really a number its only a number for the purpose of our base maths and we use base 10 if we use any other maths system in the past then 0 does not exist instead of 0, 1, 2, 3 its just 1, 2, 3
Zero as a number has nothing to do with base-10 mathematics. Base-10 mathematics predated zero-as-a-number, and zero is used as a number in other numerical bases as well (e.g., binary, hexadecimal). Zero came to be used as a number because it is convenient to have a symbol for not having anything. And remember, that's all that numbers are: SYMBOLS for a mathematical concept.
***** Yeah, that's pretty cool. Why not say it again in case anyone thought otherwise and didn't believe you the first time? Just a guess here but ...do you like turtles? It's just that you remind me of someone.
maths elf is wrong - his logic doesn't even make sense. 0 is even because 0 / 2 leaves no remainder but neither does 0 / 1 0 is the absence of a number - having 0 oranges is the complete absence of oranges, you don't have 1 oranges or 100 oranges or 0.00000000000001 of an orange, there is no orange at all, therfore it is not a number. Oh it makes mee maad
+cavey davey Any number /1 leaves zero remainder. Leaving no reminder when divided by 2 is just one of the prerequisites to be called an even number. Besides, IIRC zero is also an even number by rule, similar to how 1 is not prime even though it is only divisible by 1 and itself.
+morthasa 0/3 no remainder, 0/9 no remainder. just because rules that apply to an even number also apply to zero doesn't mean zero is even. it is neither odd nor the even because it isn't a number, it is an absence thereof
+cavey davey You must be pretty dense. Your examples are irrelevant. He says an even number must be divisible by 2 without any remainders. That's one of the prerequisites, not an arbitrary division. If you still don't get it, then it's over your head.
CalmingChaos you must be very a rude individual who's unable to understand my point. If you don't agree that is fine but at least try to be civil. Do you really believe that what you happen to have been taught is all that can possibly be correct? If so there is no point entering into a discussion with you. Although someone should discuss manners with you.
+cavey davey His point was, you're suggesting for a number to be even, say the number 9, you'd test it by saying 0/9. Whereas instead you're meant to divide 9 by 2, so 2/9 which is 4.5, not an integer. Unless I'm mis-understanding your point, that's the jist of what I got from your comments. 0/2 is 0. 1/2 is 0.5 and is odd. 2/2 is 1, so it's even. 3/2 is 1.5 so it's odd, etc etc.
Zero is neither even nor odd. It is an idea, a representational placeholder used in the communication between individuals of a single species who inhabit this measly lump of rock floating through space. Just like every other numerical or alphabetical symbol, it does not exist anywhere else in this universe naturally. I can also prove that mathematics is based on an idea and not on reality: I am holding an orange, and you are holding no oranges. So my orange is an orange and your lack of an orange is a lack of an orange, in mathematics that would be represented as 1=1 and 0=0, respectively. If i decided to rip my orange in half and hand you part of it, i could realistically say that the whole of my orange has changed but my 1 still equals 1 even though the 1 does not equal the original. You also are holding a whole even though it does not equal your original. The reality is correct even though the mathematics for me would be 1 - 0.5 = 1 and for you 0 + 0.5 = 1. In this example, the mathematics is not realistic because the 1 is our idea of the complete original intact orange only, even though that 1 can be used as a representational placeholder wherever we decided to put it, which includes the half handed to you. Oh, and this example is repeatable with the same results as it is based on reality not just an idea. A fairly obvious scientific hypothesis wouldn't you say?
+Gabriella Reid You're right that 0 is an idea made up by humans, and defined by rules we also made up. But guess what? So is "being even". Everything in mathematics is made up, usually as an abstraction of something real. The number 5 is an abstraction of examples of 5 objects. The number 0 is an abstraction of not having any instances of some object. Divisibility by 2 is an abstraction of examples of groupings of objects that can be shared evenly between 2 people. And that's where the mathematical idea of "even" comes from. Later, we gave more exact definitions of these ideas, so that we had strict rules about what we can and cannot do when we reason about them. Also, your example where you reach the equality "1 - 0.5 = 1" only works because you're mixing different units. If we write out the units, it becomes mathematically correct: 1 orange - 0.5 oranges = 1 half of an orange You can't expect a correct equation with units to still be correct when you just omit the units, unless you convert all the numbers into the same unit first. If we do that with your example, using the conversion: 1 half of an orange = 0.5 oranges We get the correct equation: 1 orange - 0.5 oranges = 0.5 oranges At this point, since all the numbers use the same unit, we can safely omit the units to get: 1 - 0.5 = 0.5 So in this case, mathematics line up just fine with reality.
Zero is not a number, it is an abstract placeholder solely used to denote that you have none of a certain subject. You also cannot divide 0 by 2 and come up with a number since zero itself "does not exist". Zero divided by 1 is zero, zero divided by 2 is zero, zero divided by 3 is zero and so on. Any number can be divided into zero but they will all have the same answer which is zero due to the fact that you are trying to divide something into nothing which will always be nothing, therefore it is neither even nor odd as it simply put.... is Naught.
As was said, all numbers are abstractly defined placeholders. None of them actually exist. A simple example: You can have a bucket with 2 apples, but you can't have just "2". Similarly, you can have a bucket with 0 apples. Mathematically speaking, 0 satisfies the standard definition of being a number, so it's a number. Also, the standard definition of even is actually that the number can be written as 2*n for some integer n. 0 is an integer, and 2*0 = 0, so 0 is even.
I also think that 0 isn't, or shouldn't be, considered a number. It's purely an abstract (even by mathematical standards), like infinity. Actually 0 is itself a form of infinity (the infinitely small), so why isn't infinity itself a number too? The only function 0 has, like you said, is being a placeholder for expressing the decimal places. If 0 is a number then, by common sense ∞ has to be a number too.
You can divide 0 by any other number, and it's extremely easy to do so. "I have nothing, and there's seven people here that I need to distribute it to. How much do they get? Oh right, nothing." You can also divide any number *by* 0 in the real world. "I have 100 apples, but no one to give them to. How much do I distribute? 0, with 100 left over."
Carlos Fernandes Maybe for writing numbers out its only function is being a placeholder in decimal notation, but once you get into actual mathematics, rather than just writing numbers, zero has many more applications and it behaves like a number. Besides, zero isn’t generally thought to represent the infinitely small. That would be the idea of an infinitesimal. Zero represent “nothingness” just like 5 represents an amount like say 5 apples but focusing on the abstract quantity. 0 would simply be no apples (or no anything for that matter). The same way 1/2 represents a half of something or 1/10 represents a tenth. 0 behaves just like a number. A number with certain peculiarities, but for example 1 also has peculiarities and no one would say it isn’t a number. Infinity doesn’t behave like a number though, so it isn’t generally considered a number. Some people disagree and say infinity should be considered a number, but I won’t get into that.
Развлечения
NOT THERE.... MIRAGE.....
🤣🤣🤣
Wait till they invite you again to tell you a past answer you gave turned out to be wrong and deduct points from you.
This show is brutal. XD
Dara o'briain triple point of water lol
"In fact, this question was so easy that you lose points for getting it right. Sorry, Phil."
Phil just might have had steam coming out of his ears if Stephen said that.
It's a sign of the shows strength that even the simplest of questions makes you sit and wonder if what you think is the answer actually is the answer.
And now Phil's daugher is a QI elf 😂
Zero is not there.
That's a numberwang!
YAAAAAAAAAY! A FELLOW NUMBERFAN!
"Once I ate sixteen cakes"
I hope they get Stephen's old friend Ken Branagh on one of the upcoming Christmas episodes. He should have been on this series ages ago.
JimmySteller Unfortunately Fry's gone now :(
The reason this wasn't simply answered was because of the way the question was asked. If you ask someone in conditions where they're expecting a trick answer they'll fall over themselves even if the answer is actually very simple or known to you already.
This show is a master at double bluffing and make you question everything you know regardless. XD
MaskofFayt But if they actually knew the whole particular topic, these trick questions wouldnt affect them at all. The show therefore promotes active knowledge and tries to punish baseless intuitive answers that they couldnt even defend properly.
I think thats brilliant.
How many brains did the man with two brains have?
It's almost a rule now that Phil should be on the Christmas episode and by God, I love them for it. He is always brilliant. Thank you for sharing this bit :D
Phil seems legit pissed off here
...even though he got it right!
The comments section on the qi videos is amazing
Is there anyone who stumbled at this question? I don't think I ever needed taught zero was even, I thought it was obvious?
Daniel-Joseph Griffin best let people think you're an idiot without opening you mouth and proving it. Obviously know all the answers to question after the event.
The fact his daughter is a QI elf
Even + even = even
Uneven + uneven = even
Uneven + even = uneven
Uneven + uneven is still uneven. Uneven x uneven = even
3+3=6(even)
3x3=9(uneven)
nope
You are right off course. I was thinking of negative. It was early though!
Why's everyone on this thread saying 'uneven'? It's odd... in both senses.
Uneven = Odd
He was still salty about the Sun not being there in P series. He may never get over it.
I love Phil!
To be perfectly fair, 0 and to a lesser extent 1 have unique properties that make them stand out to other numbers. So the answer may not be as obvious as the math elves think.
Yeah, one isn't even prime even though it technically fills all the criteria.
@@GGov86 it doesn't: it does not have _two_ integer divisors, only one
also, if 1 were prime, it would no longer allow the rule 'each integer is either a prime or a unique product of primes'
if 1 were prime, it would result in an infinite possibility of prodcuts, i.e. what it is now times an infinite possibility of powers of 1, e.g. 6 = 2*3 = 2*3*1 = 2*3*1*1 = ...
@@cfgp Yeah, I guess you can't count one twice 🤔 (itself and one). And I hadn't even thought of the other reason, but it makes sense.
Poor Phil, always defeated by big circular shapes on the screen
Wait a second, if this is the easiest question ever on QI then why did Alan get the correct answer?
Sequentially 3 is odd, 2 is even, 1 is odd so 0 must be even. you cannot have two numbers next to each other that are odd or even
You cannot have two numbers next to each other, cause that could only lead to....touching!
Who is the guy who says "It's not a number."?
That would be Brendan O'Carroll
morthasa thanks
on the number line, even numbers sit between two uneven numbers. Zero sits between 1 and -1, both uneven, so Zero is even
Zero is an even number. It exists in the same way that every other number exists - however that may be; and the reason that it is even is because it has the form 2n rather than 2n + 1.
1 is odd: it has the form 2n + 1, where n is 0. 2 x 0 = 0, 0 + 1 = 1. Ergo 1 is odd.
3 is odd: it has the form 2n + 1, where n is 1. 2 x 1 = 2, 2 + 1 = 3. Ergo, 3 is odd.
2 is even: it has the form 2n, where n = 1. 2 x 1 = 2. There is nothing to add. 2 is therefore, even.
0 is even. It has the form 2n, where n = 0. 2 x 0 = 0. Since there is nothing to add, 0 is even.
This is fucking elementary number theory.
...
It is only a number in the abstract. Numbers are only there to represent quantity and if you have none of a thing, there is no way to physically represent no-thing. Therefore zero is neither even nor a number
MichaelKingsfordGray Not at all. Obviously you can choose to count using negative numbers. But it's only symbols - neither negative numbers nor zero exist in reality.
And besides I don't believe in debt. I would either gift you the money or not. I wouldn't expect it back. That's the great evil of counting with negative numbers - that we can put our fellow human beings into debt
Anthony Peterson Positive numbers don't "exist" either. Numbers are a theoretical construct. Natural numbers are just easier to visualize/can be used to model more basic things. But 4 per se does not "exist" any more than 0, -2 or π.
i wish he was mrs brown on this show
Oh look at that, a MATHEMATICIAN thought that was an easy question.
Stupid QI elves...good on ya Phil!
Because it is an easy question...for people who understand that zero IS a number. The problem is that most people probably think zero is just a placeholder and nothing more.
Matthew Gavin
Well ignoring my sarcasm for a moment, I can easily empathize with Phil because the "elves" love to intentionally ask questions that SHOULD have obvious answers only to try to find obscure answers and use the "obvious" one as a trap.
Perfect example is when they asked "How many moons does the earth have?" And the obvious answer, ONE, was a trap answer. Their justification for this was the existence of 3753 Cruithne, with is a semi orbital celestial body that actually orbits the sun but earth's orbit directly impacts it whenever they align. TECHNICALLY the elves weren't right, but they used the fact that while it ISN'T a moon it can be qualified as a semi constant SATELLITE to justify saying that we have ONE moon is an incorrect answer.
And they do this ALL.THE.TIME. So of course when the obvious answer that zero is an even number (it has to be even or odd, right?) comes to everyone's mind, the contestants usually become apprehensive because they know chances are the elves have found the loophole that makes this line of obvious reasoning false.
There's no such thing as an "easy" question on QI. Not in the traditional sense. Not the way their researchers run it.
Yes, it is an easy question. You just need to apply reason and logic. And the same thing with the earth having more than one moon. Given that most planets which have moons have more than one, it's not too weird for the earth to be the same.
Matthew Gavin
Actually the POINT I was making is that they love using technicalities. The earth actually DOES only have one moon. It has MORE than one satellite and semi orbital celestial body, which is not the same thing. But they still decided that asking the question "How many moons does the earth have" would yield an incorrect answer unless the participant said, "Technically one moon, however we also have a 'semi moon' in the form of this celestial body."
That's NOT a simple matter of the application of logic and reason; that's subjective standards applied for the sake of absurdity in academia, and once again it illustrates why questions are rarely straightforward enough on this show to be given a label like "easy" or "hard".
Anony Mous No, they are all moons.
0 is even but it isn't really a number its only a number for the purpose of our base maths and we use base 10 if we use any other maths system in the past then 0 does not exist instead of 0, 1, 2, 3 its just 1, 2, 3
0 is definetly a number, in any base
Zero as a number has nothing to do with base-10 mathematics. Base-10 mathematics predated zero-as-a-number, and zero is used as a number in other numerical bases as well (e.g., binary, hexadecimal).
Zero came to be used as a number because it is convenient to have a symbol for not having anything. And remember, that's all that numbers are: SYMBOLS for a mathematical concept.
Phill, YOU ARE A STAR!!!
Well, that's ok because we all hate Phil Jupitus 🤷♂️
Not true -- particularly when he does his impressions of Stephen, e.g., the "Madeira pince-nez" and the "child-buffing workshop."
Do we? Why?
Weird comment.
'Hilarious' and 'Jupitus'. Two words rarely seen together, unless in the negative.
The irony being that this comment is incredibly unfunny.
Phil's right, of course. It's a crap show full of loaded questions that simply try to trick you rather than educate like it pretends.
PsyMongazoid Hmmm.. Prozac prescription has run out?
***** Fun fact: celebs get paid a lot to appear on these shows so no one thinks they hate taking part.
***** Yeah, that's pretty cool. Why not say it again in case anyone thought otherwise and didn't believe you the first time? Just a guess here but ...do you like turtles? It's just that you remind me of someone.
PsyMongazoid Dick
PsyMongazoid I'm glad you quantified my recent evaluation of you.
maths elf is wrong - his logic doesn't even make sense.
0 is even because 0 / 2 leaves no remainder but neither does 0 / 1
0 is the absence of a number - having 0 oranges is the complete absence of oranges, you don't have 1 oranges or 100 oranges or 0.00000000000001 of an orange, there is no orange at all, therfore it is not a number. Oh it makes mee maad
+cavey davey Any number /1 leaves zero remainder. Leaving no reminder when divided by 2 is just one of the prerequisites to be called an even number. Besides, IIRC zero is also an even number by rule, similar to how 1 is not prime even though it is only divisible by 1 and itself.
+morthasa 0/3 no remainder, 0/9 no remainder. just because rules that apply to an even number also apply to zero doesn't mean zero is even. it is neither odd nor the even because it isn't a number, it is an absence thereof
+cavey davey You must be pretty dense.
Your examples are irrelevant. He says an even number must be divisible by 2 without any remainders. That's one of the prerequisites, not an arbitrary division.
If you still don't get it, then it's over your head.
CalmingChaos you must be very a rude individual who's unable to understand my point. If you don't agree that is fine but at least try to be civil.
Do you really believe that what you happen to have been taught is all that can possibly be correct? If so there is no point entering into a discussion with you.
Although someone should discuss manners with you.
+cavey davey His point was, you're suggesting for a number to be even, say the number 9, you'd test it by saying 0/9. Whereas instead you're meant to divide 9 by 2, so 2/9 which is 4.5, not an integer.
Unless I'm mis-understanding your point, that's the jist of what I got from your comments. 0/2 is 0. 1/2 is 0.5 and is odd. 2/2 is 1, so it's even. 3/2 is 1.5 so it's odd, etc etc.
Zero is neither even nor odd. It is an idea, a representational placeholder used in the communication between individuals of a single species who inhabit this measly lump of rock floating through space. Just like every other numerical or alphabetical symbol, it does not exist anywhere else in this universe naturally. I can also prove that mathematics is based on an idea and not on reality:
I am holding an orange, and you are holding no oranges. So my orange is an orange and your lack of an orange is a lack of an orange, in mathematics that would be represented as 1=1 and 0=0, respectively. If i decided to rip my orange in half and hand you part of it, i could realistically say that the whole of my orange has changed but my 1 still equals 1 even though the 1 does not equal the original. You also are holding a whole even though it does not equal your original. The reality is correct even though the mathematics for me would be 1 - 0.5 = 1 and for you 0 + 0.5 = 1.
In this example, the mathematics is not realistic because the 1 is our idea of the complete original intact orange only, even though that 1 can be used as a representational placeholder wherever we decided to put it, which includes the half handed to you. Oh, and this example is repeatable with the same results as it is based on reality not just an idea. A fairly obvious scientific hypothesis wouldn't you say?
+Gabriella Reid
You're right that 0 is an idea made up by humans, and defined by rules we also made up. But guess what? So is "being even". Everything in mathematics is made up, usually as an abstraction of something real. The number 5 is an abstraction of examples of 5 objects. The number 0 is an abstraction of not having any instances of some object. Divisibility by 2 is an abstraction of examples of groupings of objects that can be shared evenly between 2 people. And that's where the mathematical idea of "even" comes from.
Later, we gave more exact definitions of these ideas, so that we had strict rules about what we can and cannot do when we reason about them.
Also, your example where you reach the equality "1 - 0.5 = 1" only works because you're mixing different units. If we write out the units, it becomes mathematically correct:
1 orange - 0.5 oranges = 1 half of an orange
You can't expect a correct equation with units to still be correct when you just omit the units, unless you convert all the numbers into the same unit first. If we do that with your example, using the conversion:
1 half of an orange = 0.5 oranges
We get the correct equation:
1 orange - 0.5 oranges = 0.5 oranges
At this point, since all the numbers use the same unit, we can safely omit the units to get:
1 - 0.5 = 0.5
So in this case, mathematics line up just fine with reality.
Zero is not a number, it is an abstract placeholder solely used to denote that you have none of a certain subject. You also cannot divide 0 by 2 and come up with a number since zero itself "does not exist". Zero divided by 1 is zero, zero divided by 2 is zero, zero divided by 3 is zero and so on. Any number can be divided into zero but they will all have the same answer which is zero due to the fact that you are trying to divide something into nothing which will always be nothing, therefore it is neither even nor odd as it simply put.... is Naught.
All numbers are abstract placeholders used to denote amounts so that doesn't disqualify it at all.
As was said, all numbers are abstractly defined placeholders. None of them actually exist.
A simple example:
You can have a bucket with 2 apples, but you can't have just "2". Similarly, you can have a bucket with 0 apples.
Mathematically speaking, 0 satisfies the standard definition of being a number, so it's a number.
Also, the standard definition of even is actually that the number can be written as 2*n for some integer n. 0 is an integer, and 2*0 = 0, so 0 is even.
I also think that 0 isn't, or shouldn't be, considered a number. It's purely an abstract (even by mathematical standards), like infinity. Actually 0 is itself a form of infinity (the infinitely small), so why isn't infinity itself a number too? The only function 0 has, like you said, is being a placeholder for expressing the decimal places. If 0 is a number then, by common sense ∞ has to be a number too.
You can divide 0 by any other number, and it's extremely easy to do so. "I have nothing, and there's seven people here that I need to distribute it to. How much do they get? Oh right, nothing."
You can also divide any number *by* 0 in the real world. "I have 100 apples, but no one to give them to. How much do I distribute? 0, with 100 left over."
Carlos Fernandes
Maybe for writing numbers out its only function is being a placeholder in decimal notation, but once you get into actual mathematics, rather than just writing numbers, zero has many more applications and it behaves like a number. Besides, zero isn’t generally thought to represent the infinitely small. That would be the idea of an infinitesimal. Zero represent “nothingness” just like 5 represents an amount like say 5 apples but focusing on the abstract quantity. 0 would simply be no apples (or no anything for that matter). The same way 1/2 represents a half of something or 1/10 represents a tenth. 0 behaves just like a number. A number with certain peculiarities, but for example 1 also has peculiarities and no one would say it isn’t a number. Infinity doesn’t behave like a number though, so it isn’t generally considered a number. Some people disagree and say infinity should be considered a number, but I won’t get into that.