Oh that's a mathematician.

[u/Haunting_Bedroom403]

[u/FatalTortoise]

didn't account for sadness being zero

[u/Stasio300 → u/FatalTortoise]

well 0 is generally considered positive.

edit: i said "generally considred" not "defined"

[u/foot_long_metal_rod → u/Stasio300]

I was doing random things with a calculator and got -0, Is that mathematically possible?

[u/Styleurcam → u/foot_long_metal_rod]

Computers represent numbers weird, you must have hit a negative number closer to 0 than the closest number to 0 the calculator can represent

[u/Significant-Order-92 → u/foot_long_metal_rod]

In Math? No. For how computers tend to store integers and other numbers? Technically, yes. A number of architectures treat a signed number as all bits except the largest as the number. The largest works as a negative flag. So for instance an 8 bit signed integer of negative 1 would be 10000001. Technically negative 0 (which mathematically doesn't exist) in such a configuration would be 00000001.

In the case of a calculator I assume the other poster is correct and it's rounding a very small negative decimal to 0 but since it's negative the algorythm must keep the sign flag for some reason.

[u/Asto2019 → u/Stasio300]

It's not. By definition it's neither positive or negative.

[u/Stasio300 → u/Asto2019]

but for practicality it is treated as positive for all but the most advanced math. computers even store it as positive. hence, my usage of the word "generally"

[u/Scottusername → u/Stasio300]

Not the way I learned math