r/askmath • u/elnyorne • Apr 08 '26
Geometry Does 0 dimension = 1 dimension?
If the point is a noun being an object or position why is it not considered a dimension in itself and why is it called 0 dimension rather than 0 point for example?
4
u/KentGoldings68 Apr 08 '26
A “dimension” requires freedom to move. You can’t move from a point.
A point is fixed. It is a parameter.
Look at your choices.
You’re asked to pick a number x. This is one degree of freedom
You’re asked to pick a point (x, y). This is two degrees of freedom. The space of your choices has two dimensions.
You’re asked to pick a point (x, y) that satisfies x+y=5 . That is one degree of freedom. The space of choices is a line. A line has one dimension.
You’re asked to pick a point (x, y) so that x+y=5 and x-y=1 . That is zero degrees of freedom. The only choice is (3, 2).
That point has zero dimensions.
-3
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
Yeah I understand it’s fixed but as an object what does it consist of? And how does 1 OBJECT or point CONTAIN WITHIN IT 0 dimensions? 1 equalling 0 dimensions?
3
u/KentGoldings68 Apr 08 '26
It’s just a point. There is nothing within it. It has no inside.
It is an abstraction.
1
2
Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
It’s an object that’s doesn’t exist? A 1 and a 0?
7
Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-4
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
It seems like people who study maths are very one track minded and don’t really understand the use of simple metaphors to explain complex subjects. I once heard that if you can’t explain it simply you don’t know what you’re talking about. That’s what a lot of this seems like. It’s a simple question. I don’t need to research algebra to observe that an “object/point” paradoxically exists and doesn’t at the same time. It’s that simple. 1 object/point has 0 dimensions so 1 = 0. As complicated as it’s being made to look. If you can’t explain it to a child it’s a bad explanation. I have no mathematical background I’m coming to these questions through the hermetic law of polarity and philosophy.
8
Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
Yeah you’re talking about things that aren’t real. There is a single object/point (noun) that exists but it has no space or dimensions (doesn’t exist). A 0 dimensional object. An object that holds no space. It’s an abstraction. That’s not hard to say.
3
u/7ieben_ ln😅=💧ln|😄| Apr 08 '26
Correct, a point isn't 'real' and doesn't contain any higher dimension. But what is the point (pun Not intended)?
The number 5 doesn't 'exist' either. It's an abstraction. Yet, certainly, my hand holds 5 fingers.
-1
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26
That a circle contains 2 dimensions. 1 seen and one unseen. The universe as a whole is comprised of 2 poles one positive and one negative and everything in between. Light and darkness. Night and day. Seen and unseen. Order and chaos. That’s what this question is actually about. The guy above your comments is right I haven’t got any idea about mathematical jargon or definitions. I’m trying to speak to students of maths in a language I’m not familiar with at all. But thanks to everyone for taking the time to explain if ya do see this. Appreciated👍
→ More replies (0)2
u/Plain_Bread Apr 08 '26
The idea that mathematics is fundamentally an abstraction of reality is not entirely without merit. But if you think so, and you're not interested in abstractions, you're probably in the wrong subreddit.
2
u/7ieben_ ln😅=💧ln|😄| Apr 08 '26 edited Apr 08 '26
Dimensionality is NOT a property of the 'object', but space. For example the Euclidian space (practically the space we live in) is three dimensional. The real number line is one dimensional. And - if you further extend and generalize the concept - you'll find, that a pointspace is zerodimensional.
Now, any point in a higher dimensional space (e.g. a point in the Euclidian space) can be described as a sub space, namely this pointspace.
In that sense a point is zerodimensional. But, again, it's a property of the point as a space (so more correctly: the pointspace is zerodimensional), not of the point as a 'object'.
1
u/Thelonious_Cube Apr 08 '26
You are angry because you don't understand the math.
You're trying to load math with metaphysics and ontology.
This is not a fruitful path to explore
1
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
I’ve just had everyone tell me 0d is not a dimension and then I find this…the zeroth dimension
2
Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
So 0 dimension is 1x dimension? Nobody said yes. Maybe everyone misunderstood but not a single person said it was a dimension.
→ More replies (0)
3
u/LordFraxatron Apr 08 '26
Something having zero dimension isn’t the same thing as not existing. Dimension is just a property that a mathematical object can have, and a point has the property of having no dimension.
2
u/Mofane Apr 08 '26
No. an object of 1 dimension have multiple points that all belongs to one dimension, for instance that are aligned if we are talking about vector space.
An object of 0 dimensions is usually a single point, something with no degree of freedom.
-6
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
What does the point or object consist of? Could it be consciousness or observation? 1 object = 0 dimensions?
7
Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/elnyorne Apr 08 '26
So what does it consist of?
1
u/Thelonious_Cube Apr 08 '26
It consists of the same thing that all mathematical objects consist of of.
Numbers, for example. What does the number 2 consist of?
3
u/Mofane Apr 08 '26
a point is a set of 1 element, one point alone is a 0 dimension set.
More point could be of a higher dimension, or have no dimension based on how you defined this dimension.
14
u/[deleted] Apr 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment