

SSCommitted
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, January 23, 2015 9:49 AM
Points: 1,945,
Visits: 3,233


Comments posted to this topic are about the item Stairway to Data, Step 2: Numerics
Books in Celko Series for MorganKaufmann Publishing Analytics and OLAP in SQL Data and Databases: Concepts in Practice Data, Measurements and Standards in SQL SQL for Smarties SQL Programming Style SQL Puzzles and Answers Thinking in Sets Trees and Hierarchies in SQL




SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 3:34 AM
Points: 2,477,
Visits: 567


The mathematical notation for repeating decimals is to put a bar over the digits in the decimal fraction which form the repeating group. Unlike fractions, there is no way to convert them into floating point or fixed decimal numbers without some loss.
Didn't you mean "like fractions" ?. It seems to me that, mathematically, any number with periodical decimal development can be set as a fraction. For example 1.35... = 1 + 35/99.




Ten Centuries
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, January 20, 2015 9:55 AM
Points: 1,071,
Visits: 924


Nice read, thanks. Be useful for many a kid in maths class too!
Incidentally, did you run a find and replace for many to y, or did I miss something?




SSC Eights!
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, October 18, 2013 6:12 AM
Points: 952,
Visits: 552


I've always thought that there was some fallacy when subtracting two irrational numbers to come up with a rational number (9.99...  .99 = 9). I don't have the training to prove or disprove it; it's just a gut feeling.




SSC Rookie
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, October 1, 2014 10:49 AM
Points: 30,
Visits: 124


Stephen_W_Dodd (5/18/2011) I've always thought that there was some fallacy when subtracting two irrational numbers to come up with a rational number (9.99...  .99 = 9). I don't have the training to prove or disprove it; it's just a gut feeling.
They're actually rational  the digits after the decimal have a repeating pattern. But subtracting an irrational number from another irrational number can easily end up as a rational number: if the first irrational number was (1 + v2) and the second was v2, then subtracting the second from the first results in 1. But subtracting two rationals from each other will always result in another rational number, since the set of rationals is closed under addition.




Valued Member
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 4:12 PM
Points: 56,
Visits: 31


What did you mean by "v2, p"? I figured "pi" for "p", but what is "V2"?




Valued Member
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 4:12 PM
Points: 56,
Visits: 31


In relation to "mathematically, any number with periodical decimal development can be set as a fraction."  I tend to disagree. There are numbers (like sq root of 2  and pi) that I seriously doubt can be expressed as a sum of a rational number and a fraction.
Might be interesting to try to prove that but I'm already 68 yrs old and I don't think I have enough time.
Oops! I forgot  Pi and Sq Root of 2 do not have repeating patterns. So what I said did not apply to the prev statement i quoted.
Pi & Sq root of 2 are true irrational numbers.




SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, January 21, 2015 3:34 AM
Points: 2,477,
Visits: 567


Henry B. Stinson (5/18/2011) In relation to "mathematically, any number with periodical decimal development can be set as a fraction."  I tend to disagree. There are numbers (like sq root of 2  and pi) that I seriously doubt can be expressed as a sum of a rational number and a fraction.
Might be interesting to try to prove that but I'm already 68 yrs old and I don't think I have enough time.
Oops! I forgot  Pi and Sq Root of 2 do not have repeating patterns. So what I said did not apply to the prev statement i quoted.
Pi & Sq root of 2 are true irrational numbers.
To prove that (Sq root of 2) can not be set as a rational fraction is very easy : If it could be set, let a/b be that fraction (a and b being coprimes). (a/b)^{2} = 2 by definition.
so a^{2} = 2 b^{2}, what is impossible, a and b being coprimes.
It is also easy to prove that any number with a periodical decimal development can be set as a fraction :
1/ all cases can be brought back to 0 with the periodical pattern beginnin immediately after the colon. 2/ Let x be the number p the pattern and n the number of its digits.
So x = p/10^{n} + p/10^{2n} + ... This is the sum of a geometrical progression whose first term is p/10^{n} and ratio 1/10^{n}. That sum is (first term) / (1  ratio)
So x = p/ (10^{n}  1).
Qed
Sorry, I'm only 61




Valued Member
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 4:12 PM
Points: 56,
Visits: 31


Very Cool!
Next you'll be sending me the solution to Fermat's Last Theorem (without looking it up). :)




Forum Newbie
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Tuesday, September 30, 2014 9:27 PM
Points: 1,
Visits: 0


V2 is the point on the tarmac where rotation occurs Sorry, I am not a mathematician, just a bad joker...



