The oldest "0" in India for which one can assign a definite date

An earlier use of zero (as defined in the article) for which one can assign a definite date was in 357 AD. The gotcha is that it's not the circle we're so familiar with. This is the first Mayan (Olmec) long-count recorded containing a zero, although long-counts showing a clear positional number system were recorded in the first century BC.<p><a href="http://books.google.ca/books?id=TzrNgAsJY1MC&#38;lpg=PP1&#38;pg=PA49#v=onepage&#38;q&#38;f=false" rel="nofollow">http://books.google.ca/books?id=TzrNgAsJY1MC&#38;lpg=PP1&#38...</a><p>While the use of zero in India may have been influenced by earlier cultures (e.g. Babylon), it's pretty unlikely there was any direct contact that could have spread the use of zero to mesoamerica. Thus, positional number systems with a zero place-holder have been invented independenly at least twice in human history!

"New numbers" are invented to complete a group for a particular arithmetic operation. Zero is not necessary the addition operation because all cardinals one and above suffice. Zero is created for the subtraction operation of a cardinal with itself.<p>There were empty place holders signs in place-number systems of Babylonia and ancent China that function like our zero numeral. But this placeholder did not enter arithmetic operations. So it is not considered the "modern" zero.<p>Ditto creating negative numbers for cmpleting the subtraction operation group. Ratios for cardinal division. Real numbers for some ratios that are not cardinals. Infinity for zero divisors. Irrationals for roots of cardinals. Imaginaries for roots of negatives. Infinitesmals in differentiation and integration. And so on ...<p>At some point in medevial times each of these new numbers were considered the work of the Devil because they did not have concrete existance in the physical world. Later on accountants showed how zero &#38; negative numbers were usefule for business. And physicists showed how these new numbers could predict the physical world.

A recent article of related interest is the story of the recovery of the oldest datable inscription that shows a numeral zero used in base-ten place-value notation, "How I Rediscovered the Oldest Zero in History,"<p><a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/05/20/how-i-rediscovered-the-oldest-zero-in-history" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2013/05/20/how-i-redi...</a><p>which links to the article kindly submitted here.<p>The submission title here is NOT the original article title, as preferred by the Hacker News guidelines, and the other recent article suggests that the title shown on the submission here is not fully accurate for all regions of the world.

Apparently, this article is about oldest known depection of <i>symbol</i> of zero (i.e. a circle), which is found in Gwalior's Chatur Bhuja temple.<p>But, zero in decimal place-value system[1] and zero's usage as a number[2][3] are much older.<p>[1]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokavibhaga" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lokavibhaga</a><p>[2]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C4%81hmasphu%E1%B9%ADasiddh%C4%81nta" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C4%81hmasphu%E1%B9%ADasiddh%...</a><p>[3]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmagupta#Zero" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahmagupta#Zero</a>

I'm not sure what the article claims here. This is the first dated inscription but the positional arabic notation (with a zero like glyph) had been in use for at least 300 years earlier. If you consider other place value systems the concept of a 'separator' goes back much farther.<p>This isn't necessarily evidence that they understood zero as a number as opposed to a concept. By 1000 in Europe they used a symbol as a placeholder that looked superficially similar to our modern glyph of zero. When explaining it, however, it was clear it was simply a placeholder that could always be omitted and was "sometimes useful" and was absolutely not really a number. It isn't clear that the glyph used here or in Europe was anything more than an elaborate 'dot.' It certainly didn't seem to be be transmitted as a recognizable glpyh but each culture rendered it in the way most convenient as a counting and placeholder aid.

Very interesting!<p>Of course, reading "Those who can access JSTOR can find some of the papers mentioned above there" demonstrates once more that, alas, the digital divide still exists.

OT: in Arabic Zero is "Ciphr" or "Cipher" where we get the words decipher or cipher from.

So if 0 wasn't a concept, you couldn't count to 10?<p>I'm not sure I understand. I thought the significance of 0 was the recognition of an absence of existence. Just because numbers use 0 (270, 50, 20, etc.) wouldn't seem to indicate that it was understood at that significance...

"The history of zero is a <i>bit</i> complicated."<p>I see what you did there

Also notable here is Aryabhatta who used a base of 10 symbol for zero[1]. Though he didn't use the notation '0'. [1]<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhata#Place_value_system_and_zero" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhata#Place_value_system_an...</a>