On 1 Feb, 06:12, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 1 Feb, 06:06, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > How is fraction 1/3 expressed in base 3, of course in base 10 it do > > have unfinished decimalexpansion. > > But has it really in base 3??? > > > And this is where number zero gets interesting, because when you use > > zero number 3 is expressed 10 in base 3 right? > > > But in a number system without 0 it should *undoubtly* be expressed a > > single 1. And number 6 be 11 number 9 be 12 do you people agree? > > > From this also follow that 1/3 in such a number system would be > > expressed .3 do you people agree? > > I could easily adjust my base changer to this, and in this zeroless > > number system 3+1/3 would be expressed 1,1 > > > 6+1/3 would be expressed 2,1 > > > Now can you people see any benefits from my new bases without 0. It > > seem that unfinished decimal expansion vanished or? > > Ooops of course 9 should be expressed 21 in the zeroless base system. > How does this basesystem make you feel angry, annoying or just > uninteresting? > There is something deep profound to all this, if i just could remember > what. I think it has something todo with factoring. > > For now i just wants commenting upon the proposed new bases without > zeros good or bad, advantages disadvantages?
Would you like me make a version of my base changer where 1/3 do not have unfinished decimal expansion and all bases expressed without ones?