So… yes. I’m a software developer. This means that I can count to 16 very easily. So easily that I use letters to fill the space until I hit 10 (referring to 16, without abandon or care)
I’ve tired of base 16. I decided to play with something a little more obscure.
I played with base 7.4
Where is in decimal you have : 1000s, 100s, 10s, 1s, .1, .10, .100, etc…
In base 7.4 you have:
7.4^3, 7.4^2, 7.4^1, 7.4^0, 7.4^-1, 7.4^-2, 7.4^-3
So at first all worked out.
10(10) = 12.431644201(7.4)
9(10) = 11.431644201(7.4)
8(10) = 10.431644201(7.4)
Then I made the mistake of solving for
7.4(10) = 10(7.4)
I came up with 7.270551032(7.4)
that’s right. In Base 7.4:
10(7.4) == 7.270551032(7.4)
Oops.
I love moments when you prove different numbers are the same.
I looked at shimmeringjemmy at this point and said, “I think I broke Math”
So… my new form of using rational non-integers as numeration bases shall from this day forward have a name.
I call my system:
“Crystal Math”
« Beatbox redux… and then some: Lasse Gjertsen When Irony steps in… does anyone else see the humour? »
This is Indeed Nifty, and therefore earns the Seal of Niftiness ™. However, one begins to wonder just how much you are overclocking your leetle gray cells to come up with this idea in the first place.
…and what he’s been imbibing. 🙂
Crystal Math?
Hahahahahahaha!
I hope no housewives develop a liking for it. ;-]
Housewives… no
But due to back alley think tanks popping up to sell these theories to unexpecting high school calc students, the governement has taken the necessary steps.
You can now no longer do over the counter fractions. Divisors must be signed for at the proctors desk and you will need to show state ID as well as put your signature to a form that you will not misuse division in excess of a federally regulated maximum.
Re: Housewives… no
Figures.
Some people just have to ruin math for everyone…
;-]
“Crystal Math”….
Groooooaaaaan!
Crystal Math…. groan.
10(7.4) == 7.270551032(7.4) – reminds me of how -40 centigrade and -40 fahrenheit are the same.
*dies of pun*
too much free time today?
I proved on a Calculus test once that all right triangles have to have at least on side of length zero. That’s a bad thing to prove on a test…
-ken-
Alright then
X = 1 now multiply each side by x
X2 = X next subtract 1 from each side
X2-1 = X-1 time to factor the left side
(X+1)(X-1) = X-1 cancel the like factors
X+1 = 1 now substitute X on the left
1+1 = 1 compute the left
2 = 1 oops
Re: Alright then
Of course, X-1 = 0, therefore, (X+1)(X-1) = (X-1) implies (X+1)(X-1) = 0
((X+1)(X-1))/(X-1) = 0/(X-1)
X+1 = 0
1+1 = 0
2 = 0
so, if 2=1 and 2=0, 1=0, therefore 1111 = 0000, so 8 = 0…
Re: Alright then
Great… see I told you they were gonna have to regulate division.
This is actually the case with integer radixes as well — in every numeral system, terminating representations always have a non-terminating dual. It’s just that when the radix is an integer, the non-terminating representation is repeating. (such as, 1.0 == 0.9999…)