On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 12:51:04PM +0100, Emanuel Berg wrote:
> tomas wrote:
> 
> >> 0 is not natural according to this source:
> >> 
> >>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/data/numbers.txt
> >
> > That source is wrong half of the time.
> 
> The sources for the source are:
> 
>   https://davenport.libguides.com/math-skills-overview/basic-operations/sets
>   https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/find-the-first-n-pure-numbers/

Extend your sources. They aren't wrong, but they aren't right either.

I recommend at least skimming this discussion, which gives an idea
on how diverse the whole thing is:

  https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/283/is-0-a-natural-number

The most interesting answers, which parody what has been happening
here are those which say "it's this (or that) way because I learnt
it in school, dammit". 

Cheers
-- 
t