JT
Posts:
1,200
Registered:
4/7/12


Re: show the cannonical baseone digital representation not Godam hashmarks thank you don't do it again <endquote>
Posted:
Apr 10, 2013 7:52 PM


On 11 Apr, 00:35, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 Apr, 21:07, 1treePetrifiedForestLane <Space...@hotmail.com> > wrote: > > > see Stevin's _The Decimals_ for the ambguous case in odometermath, > > cannonically: ...0001.0000... defined isomorphic to ...0000.9999... > > Why don't you like the hashmarks it is afterall what your dreamed up > numberline is made of, and YOU have to partition it to make any sense. > Since the reals is not baseless, but fractions are. > > If you wanted to represent a binary 5 as 101 ={{{1111}}1} that just > will grove weirder with the number of zeros because there is no > decomposition into the base, just a freaking huge collection that may > or may not be a square. > > Counting base 1 5={1,1,1,1,1} > Binary 5={{1,1}{1,1}1} > Ternary 5={{1,1,1}1,1} > Quaternary 5={{1,1,1,1}1} > Senary 5={1,1,1,1,1} > Septenary 5={1,1,1,1,1} > Octal 5={1,1,1,1,1} > Nonary 5={1,1,1,1,1} > Decimal 5={1,1,1,1,1} > > I have not thought about representing base1(unary?) fractionals > becase > fractionals is superior to partitioning into base, but possible .{1} > for 1/3 and 3/9 .{{1,1,1} 9/27 .{{{1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1} what do you > think. Ternarys if anyone in doubt...
This is the true nature of numbers collections and cuts, the > number line is just dreamed up. Numbers are baseless we partition and > create the semantics the collections is interpretated in, not the > other way around. And i show you the simples semantics for numbers. > Collections and cuts. >
Ternarys if anyone in doubt.. > I have not thru about howto represent base1(unary?) fractionals > becase > fractionals is superior to partitioning into base, but possible .{1} > for 1/3 and 3/9 .{{1,1,1} 9/27 .{{{1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1} what do you > think. > > Do you have any problem interpretate this numbersystem, in reality > though there are better representations more compact. But they are all > without zeros and bijective.

