3 ms·
0.0...1 is a very interesting number. Normally, one indexes digits by integers (there's a first digit, a second digit,...) But here you have digits seemingly
by jibiki 17y ago
0.0...1 is a very interesting number. Normally, one indexes digits by integers (there's a first digit, a second digit,...) But here you have digits seemingly indexed by ordinals. The omega-th digit is 1. I don't think you can make a consistent number system this way. Here's the problem: what is 10*0.00...1? It can't have omega-th digit "10" because 10 isn't a digit. It can't have omega-th digit 1 and omega+1-th digit 0, because that should be the same as 0.00...1, under any logic I can think of. So that number system doesn't work.
The real numbers, by contrast, have the advantage of working (so far as we know.)
- drcode 17y agoOK, that's the most convincing argument I've heard so far. The omega+1-th digit would need to be 1, for your example. I'm not entirely sure that it has to be the same as 0.00...1, as you argue. However, you're definitely showing that this way of handling fraction would probably get to be pretty ridiculous at some point.