3 ms·
> Obviously we'll want a symbolic representation for the real number 1 Sorry, why is this obvious? A basic int type can store the value of 1, let alone the mo
by CydeWeys 2y ago
> Obviously we'll want a symbolic representation for the real number 1
Sorry, why is this obvious? A basic int type can store the value of 1, let alone the more complicated Rational (BigNum/BigNum) type they have. I can absolutely see why you want symbolic representations for pi, e, i, trig functions, etc., but why one?!
- earthicus 2y agoI think the issue was that they are representing a real as a product of a rational and that more complicated type, so without a symbolic representation for 1, when representing and rational, they would have to multiply it by a RRA representation of 1 which brings in all the decision problem issues.
- ChadNauseam 2y agoYep, this is exactly it!
- ChadNauseam 2y agoSorry for being unclear about this. A number is being expressed as a rational times a real. In the case where the rational is exactly the number we want, we want to be able to set the real to 1, so the multiplication has no effect
- CydeWeys 2y agoAhhh OK so it's essentially the null or identity value, saying "you don't need this component for an exact representation". That makes sense, thanks.
- ComputerGuru 2y agoBecause they express numbers as rational times a real, so the real in all those cases would be one. When it’s one, you do rational math as normal without involving reals.