Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Jeffrey Schwab <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 16:56:02 GMT
Oliver Wong wrote:
"Jeffrey Schwab" <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:V1zef.1144$3o6.419146@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Can we assume that each rational number we need to represent must have be arrived at by some sequence of mathematical operations? If so, each such number can be represented by the sequence of operations that invokes it.
For any number X (rational or otherwise), we can arrive at it by starting with X and doing zero operations on it. This doesn't nescessarily prove that X can be represented with finite memory though.
Of course not. That would be cheating.
If X is rational, then we sort of apriori have to assume that the step of "start with X" requires finite memory, to which we perform 0 operations (thus adding a overhead of 0 memory) and end up with finite memory requirements again.
Yes, that's true. But can you please point me to an irrational number that cannot be derived by a sequence of mathematical operations on rational numbers?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Oliver Wong
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- References:
- BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: javerberg
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Oliver Wong
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Roedy Green
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Jeffrey Schwab
- Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- From: Oliver Wong
- BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- Prev by Date: Re: URL launching behaviour using showDocument in IE6(sp2 XP)
- Next by Date: Access to an https page with certificate
- Previous by thread: Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- Next by thread: Re: BigDecimal and trigonometrics
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|