377
show your rule (lemmy.cafe)
submitted 1 year ago by spujb@lemmy.cafe to c/196@lemmy.blahaj.zone
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] jastyty@lemmy.world 55 points 1 year ago

In binary the answer is good, which is fun

[-] Eagle0600@yiffit.net 84 points 1 year ago

In binary the one on the left is meaningless, and therefore the two cannot be compared. In any base in which they can be compared, the one on the left is smaller.

[-] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 28 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] Eagle0600@yiffit.net 13 points 1 year ago

Alright, you've got me there.

[-] Sonotsugipaa@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

Wouldn't that require the number of available digits to be 1/10?

[-] itslilith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 1 year ago

Fractional bases are weird, and I think there's even competing standards. What I was thinking is that you can write any number in base n like this:

\sum_{k= -โˆž}^{โˆž} a_k * n^k

where a_k are what we would call the digits of a number. To make this work (exists and is unique) for a given positive integer base, you need exactly n different symbols.

For a base 1/n, turns out you also need n different symbols, using this definition. It's fairly easy to show that using 1/n just mirrors the number around the decimal point (e.g. 13.7 becomes 7.31)

I am not very well versed in bases tho (unbased, even), so all of this could be wrong.

[-] Zoboomafoo@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

The rainbow represents Alan Turing, who taught the child binary

this post was submitted on 27 Dec 2023
377 points (100.0% liked)

196

16818 readers
2010 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS