Paul Giaccone wrote:
Really? No mathematician I have ever met (and I have met very many) would do that. "Strictly positive" is tautologous. "Positive" is defined as "greater than zero", so anyone who uses it differently is mistaken and liable to be misunderstood. If someone means "x >= 0", then the term for that is "non-negative". There are two different definitions of natural numbers (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_numbers ) so sometimes one has to qualify what definition he uses: "natural numbers with zero" or "natural numbers without zero" :)
This can sometimes lead to confusion with the meaning of "positive", so terms like "strictly positive" and "non-negative" are used. PS: I'm a mathematician by training. -- With respect, Alex Besogonov (cyberax@elewise.com)