Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics

On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 21:10:08 GMT, Jeffrey Schwab
<jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who
said :

>That's only true if one assumes a traditional floating-point
>representation. There are plenty of techniques (continued fractions,
>symbolic algebra, etc.) for representing irrational numbers with
>infinite precision in finite memory.

I think you are confusing rational repeaters (which can be accurately
represented by a rational fraction) with irrationals that at best
could be described as a limit of a series, e.g. pi, e.

Remember the proof that there are non-rational numbers, discovered,
IIRC by the ancient Greeks. There is no way you can map all
rationals, much less all irrationals with perfect accuracy into a
finite address space. There an infinite but countably many rationals
and uncountably many irrationals. (One of my pet peeves is
newscasters who use the term "uncountable" to mean "a large number" or
"more than I can count on my fingers".)

"Countable" to mathematicians means there exists a 1-1 mapping between
the set and the set of integers.

--
Canadian Mind Products, Roedy Green.
http://mindprod.com Java custom programming, consulting and coaching.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
    ... >>representation. ... > represented by a rational fraction) with irrationals that at best ... There an infinite but countably many rationals ... decimal expansion, which is sometimes possible, or a fraction of two finite ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
    ... representation. ... There are plenty of techniques (continued fractions, symbolic algebra, etc.) for representing irrational numbers with infinite precision in finite memory. ... There is no way you can map all rationals, much less all irrationals with perfect accuracy into a finite address space. ...
    (comp.lang.java.programmer)
  • Re: Rational numbers
    ... >why irrationals exist, but, if you wish more precise language, what is ... numbers with REPRESENTATION. ... Therefore, numbers whose decimal expansion is infinite, but not ... contain the rationals as a proper subset. ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: infinitely many nns = infinite nns?
    ... every two irrationals, it would seem that the rationals and the ... Possibly at first glance, but that assumes that the number of rationals between two irrationals is the same as the number of irrationals between two rationals, which is distinctly not the case. ... There are never two or more reals "in a row" without others between them, regardless of their rationality or lack therof. ... Now, if we want to say that we are limited by potential infinity when mentally examining a structure with actually infinitely many elements, I would certainly agree that we cannot mentally examine the elements individually, but in the limit, where actual infinity either CAN be used, or at least predicted, there cannot be a y between ANY two x's. ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Rational/Irrational Numbers
    ... irrationals into the rationals and thus a surjection from the rationals ... for Union Q_h < Q_i.) ... rationals and irrationals are each dense in the reals, ...
    (sci.math)