Talk About Network

Google


Register and Login
Nick
Password
Register create new account Sign up is FREE and you can post replies, new topics, bookmark posts and more!
Recover lost password


Programming > Cobol > Re: Decimal ver...
Latest [ Topics | Posts ] Archive Post A New Topic Post a Reply
<< Topic < Post Post 11 of 53 Topic 4077 of 4172
Post > Topic >>

Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/discussion

by Michael Wojcik <mwojcik@[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Apr 8, 2008 at 04:57 PM

Richard wrote:
> 
> Robert wrote:
> 
>> In phinary, EVERY number can be represented exactly in a
>> finite string of 0s and 1s, including e, pi and square root of 2.
> 
> In a finite string of 0s and 1s of length n 2^n different values can
> be be represented. Regardless of what those representable values may
> be there will always be another number that is not in that set of
> values, in fact there will still be an infinite number of
> unrepresented values.

And, indeed, the very references Robert cited note a number of values 
that have repeating, but infinite, decimal expansions in phinary. 
Indeed, the Wikipedia page claims that only elements of the field 
Q[\sqrt 5] have repeating or terminating expressions in phinary.

There are some numbers which are not the sum of a rational number and 
the product of a rational number times the square root of five. I'm 
pretty sure I have one around here somewhere... oh, there you are, 
\sqrt 2!

So there isn't even finite *notation* for all numbers in phinary. As 
indeed there could not be, by the pigeonhole principle (as Richard 
notes above), the Berry Paradox, or any other version of that old saw. 
Countable versus uncountable infinity and diagonalization and all that.

And again according to Wackipedia, ALL non-integer rationals have 
non-finite phinary representations, though they all repeat.

All that said, phinary *is* kind of cool.

-- 
Michael Wojcik
 




 53 Posts in Topic:
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
"Frank Swarbrick&quo  2008-04-01 13:14:46 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Clark F Morris <cfmpub  2008-04-01 19:29:05 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Binyamin Dissen <posti  2008-04-02 10:18:01 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Alistair <alistair@[EM  2008-04-05 14:39:44 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-05 18:46:10 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 21:53:28 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 22:09:08 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-08 22:05:16 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
"Rick Smith" &l  2008-04-09 10:16:29 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 22:16:47 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
Michael Wojcik <mwojci  2008-04-08 16:57:05 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 22:29:07 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-08 21:59:07 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 22:41:07 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-07 22:54:32 
Sampling accuracy and everyone being wrong was Re: Decimal vers
Clark F Morris <cfmpub  2008-04-08 10:31:39 
Re: Sampling accuracy and everyone being wrong was Re: Decimal
docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-04-08 14:48:38 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-08 21:41:10 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-09 19:19:26 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
Richard <riplin@[EMAIL  2008-04-09 18:45:59 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 -
"Frank Swarbrick&quo  2008-04-03 18:42:16 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-04 00:13:23 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"William M. Klein&qu  2008-04-04 05:52:42 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-07 22:41:47 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-04 07:50:39 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-04 19:51:24 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-04-05 01:39:33 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-04 21:54:44 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-04-06 02:23:46 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-07 22:39:38 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-08 08:47:27 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-08 20:39:22 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-09 07:51:19 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-09 20:00:40 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-10 07:36:17 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-10 08:53:22 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-09 07:53:32 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-09 19:54:10 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-07 08:07:32 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"tlmfru" <la  2008-04-05 10:54:00 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-05 18:18:13 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"tlmfru" <la  2008-04-07 11:08:23 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-07 21:11:04 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"tlmfru" <la  2008-04-08 11:00:52 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-07 08:09:26 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"tlmfru" <la  2008-04-07 10:49:27 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-07 08:04:00 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"HeyBub" <he  2008-04-04 08:53:49 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-04 21:19:36 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
"Pete Dashwood"  2008-04-05 17:34:51 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
docdwarf@[EMAIL PROTECTED  2008-04-05 14:03:36 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Howard Brazee <howard@  2008-04-07 08:12:37 
Re: Decimal versus binary arithmetic was Re: J4 - presentation/d
Robert <no@[EMAIL PROT  2008-04-07 20:24:59 

Post A Reply:
  Go here to Signup

AddThis Feed Button


About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup

Contact
tan12V112 Wed Jul 9 2:39:16 CDT 2008.