Origin of the numerals, Zero concept

TL;DR

The paper clarifies misconceptions about the Indian origin of numerals, distinguishing between different types of zero and their historical representations, emphasizing the influence of Arabic numerals rather than Indian origins.

Contribution

It differentiates between the intuitive, numeral, and mathematical zero, clarifies linguistic origins, and challenges the hypothesis of Indian origin of modern numerals.

Findings

'Sifr' predates zero and is not derived from 'Shunya'.

The current zero symbol '0' results from Ghubari numerals.

Confusions arise from conflating different zero concepts.

Abstract

The partisans of the hypothesis of the Indian origin of the numerals create confusion between the history of the Indian mathematics and the history of our modern numerals. To argue the thesis of the Indian origin of the numbers they confound between: the "intuitive zero " of Brahmagupta, that means ''nothing'' and which is the difference of two equal numbers, the "numeral zero" used in the representation of the numbers and the "mathematical zero" defined by the modern mathematicians. "Sifr" designate the "numeral zero" and "Shunya" designate the "intuitive zero". The word "Sifr" is not a traduction of the word "Shunya" and does not derive from the Indian word "Shunya", since the word "Sifr" and its derivatives existed in Arabic long before the appearance of zero itself The facts that the "intuitive zero" and the "mathematical zero" are represented currently by the "numerals zero" symbol "0" are only consequences of the representation of the numbers by the "Ghubari" numerals