home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky rec.humor:34560 rec.humor.d:2692 alt.folklore.computers:16567
- Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!spool.mu.edu!darwin.sura.net!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!gmuvax2!2261as
- From: 2261as@gmuvax2.gmu.edu ( )
- Newsgroups: rec.humor,rec.humor.d,alt.folklore.computers
- Subject: Re: base -2 arithmetic (was: Re: Trinary)
- Message-ID: <1992Nov21.223619.13299@gmuvax2.gmu.edu>
- Date: 21 Nov 92 22:36:19 GMT
- References: <3ug2TB6w165w@mertwig.UUCP> <BxL834.GDv@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <1992Nov12.143325.17656@u.washington.edu>
- Organization: George Mason University, Fairfax, Va.
- Lines: 49
-
- In article <1992Nov12.143325.17656@u.washington.edu> whit@carson.u.washington.edu (John Whitmore) writes:
- >In article <BxL834.GDv@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> norlin@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Norman Lin) writes:
- >
- >>I missed the first part of this thread, so forgive me if this has already
- >>been said: for strictly positive numbers, I think base 1 is suitable:
- >>
- >>1: 1
- >>2: 11
- >>3: 111
- >>4: 1111
- >>5: 11111
- >>... ad nauseum.
- >
- > Yes, that DOES work. The difficulty is in representing
- >real numbers (as fractions).
- >
- >1: .1
- >2: .11
- >3: .111
- >4: .1111
- >
- >but
- >1/2: ???
- >
- > John Whitmore
-
-
- according to this, 1/2 would be
- [.11111...] doesn't anyone here remember combinatorics?
-
- I'd like to see someone represent 0.
-
- [0] -ten = [ ] -one right
-
- I always thought the number bases started with [0] myself.
- so base one is any representation of [0] = 0.
- And of course, the complement is [0]
- so long precision arithmatics goes like:
-
- 00000
- +00000
- ---------------------
- 00000 = [0]-ten
-
- and logical shifts go like:
- 000
- *000
- -----------------------
- 000 = [0*0=0] -ten
-