jana

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I'm in the process of doing so now

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Computers are binary, yeah? So we have to represent fractional numbers with binary, too.

In decimal, numbers past the decimal point are 10^-1, 10^-2, ... etc. In binary, they're 2^-1, 2^-2, ....

2^-1 is one half, so 0.1 in binary is 0.5 in decimal. 2^-2 is one quarter. 0.11 in binary is 0.75 in decimal. And of course you've got 0.01 = 0.25

The problem comes when representing decimal numbers that don't have neat binary representations. For instance, 0.1 in decimal is actually a repeating binary number: 0.0001100110011...

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Fun fact: NaN is of type number

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yes. But that's not why they're trying to impeach him.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Good lord that fucker is huge

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

You're adding a bunch of zeroes. Zero is the additive identity. It doesn't change the value.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Why not? How does that change the value?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Infinities do have different sizes, yes. But not on that scale. Both of these are countably infinite sets.

Think about this: there are infinitely many primes. Obviously, not every number is prime. But you can still map primes 1:1 with the natural numbers. They're both the same size of infinity.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

That's not how infinity works

view more: ‹ prev next ›