Moderator: Flannel Jesus
Flannel Jesus wrote:
Of course, 12/3 is 4 and 4*3 is 12.
Flannel Jesus wrote:1200% of what?
Flannel Jesus wrote:Sure, yes.
Flannel Jesus wrote:Yes that's all fine.
Flannel Jesus wrote:Yes, I don't see why not.
Flannel Jesus wrote:1/3 dozen, or 100/3 percent of a dozen.
I think for the sake of this conversation I'll agree with the general notion that infinite decimals are nonsensical, if that suits you.
Flannel Jesus wrote:I don't think I agree that "fractions aren't numbers", but nonetheless I'll humour you
It seems that you only want to see it in radix point notation. Since we're agreeing that infinite decimals are nonsensical, then this particular value isn't purely representable in base 10 radix notation. It can only be approximated, as 0.33333.... or 33.333...%
However, this very same value can be represented without infinite numbers after the radix in other bases. For example, as 0.2 in base 6.
Flannel Jesus wrote:I didn't actually know that we were talking ABOUT base 10. I did assume that we were using base 10, but I think it's important to distinguish between "using base 10" and "talking about base 10".
Are we talking about base 10? Or are we merely using base 10?
Flannel Jesus wrote:I didn't bring up other bases then because other bases didn't serve any purpose at that point in the conversation. The meaning of integer numbers is always unambiguous. The meaning of radix point numbers, however, especially ones that are infinitely long ARE ambiguous in the context of this conversation, so disambiguating in that context is useful.
It's very important that we distinguish between "using base 10" and "talking about base 10". We've been using English this whole time, but we have not been talking ABOUT English.
The scope of the claim is very important. If you say 1/3 is impossible, it's very important to clarify what that is a claim about. Is that a claim about base 10? As in, you don't believe that 1/3 is impossible in the real world, it's just impossible using base 10 numbers?
I would like to get this point clarified first a foremost.
Flannel Jesus wrote:It's not a word game. It's an integral point. "Word game much" doesn't feel like a good faith thing to say. I want to continue this conversation, but not when relevant points are dismissed as word games. Whether you claim is a claim about reality, or about base 10, is entirely relevant. They are two very different positions.
Flannel Jesus wrote:No, and I didn't imply otherwise.
The question was never what you were using, I have not ever questioned even once what base you were USING. I have questioned what the conversation was ABOUT, if it was about base 10, but I have never once questioned which base you were using.
Return to Science, Technology, and Math
Users browsing this forum: No registered users