Comment on I predict that this post will get approximately 01000011100101100000000000000000

SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

• ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  But floating-point notation also can’t precisely represent irrational numbers…

  source

  • SkybreakerEngineer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    But some irrational numbers are only so in base 10

    source

    • very_well_lost@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      What? That’s not true at all…

      source

      • swab148@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        Base π: π=1

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • muntedcrocodile@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Kinda. Technicaly no since an irrational number is a number that cannot be defined as a ratio of 2 existing rational numbers. Any number that can be represented in any rational base can by definition be represented as a ratio of somthing/base^n.

      What u think ur trying to say is that some numbers cannot be represented in one base but can in another for example 1/3 can be represented as a decimal in base 3 but cannot jn base 10 ie u get 0.333(3 repeating forever).

      Tieing back to floating point which uses base 2 u end up with simmillar issues with base10 base2 conversions hence most of the errors with floating point errors (yes at very large and very small numbers u lose accuracy but in practice most errors arise from base convention).

      source
  • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    What superior method do you propose?

    source

    • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      Being a believer in Pythagoreanism and considering irrational numbers blasphemous.

      source
    • MBM@lemmings.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Symbolical computation is cool

      source