3 ms·
But the number 3 is there just because we decide to calculate digits in base 10. We could encode Pi in binary instead, and since it doesn't repeat it necessaril
by pilaf 2y ago
But the number 3 is there just because we decide to calculate digits in base 10. We could encode Pi in binary instead, and since it doesn't repeat it necessarily will never be a point where there will never be another 1 or a 0, right?
- bubblyworld 2y agoThat's true - you can quite easily prove that an eventually constant sequence of decimals codes for a rational number. But it's also true that pi may not contain every _possible_ sequence of decimals, no matter what base you pick. Like the Riemann hypothesis, it seems very likely and people have checked a lot of statistics, but nobody has proven it beyond a (mathematical) shadow of doubt.
- _fizz_buzz_ 2y agoObviously, it was just an example to illustrate what a non-periodic number could look like that doesn’t contain all possible permutations. If the number never contains the digit 3 in base 10 it will also not contain all possible permutations in all other bases.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]