Non-Integral Bases in Computer Science | CompSci Forum Discussion

  • Thread starter Thread starter abhishek
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bases
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of non-integral bases in computer science, specifically regarding their validity and implications. Participants express skepticism about using non-integer bases, citing issues like accuracy and non-uniqueness in representations. The challenge arises from the inability to define digit values consistently when bases are non-integers, such as π. Despite these concerns, there is curiosity about potential applications and mathematical properties of numbers expressed in non-integral bases. The conversation highlights the complexity and theoretical implications of exploring bases beyond traditional integers.
abhishek
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Apologies if this is in the wrong forum. :smile:

In a discussion we're having on our compsci forums at uni, about binary numbers, someone brought up the notion of non-integral bases. I take it to mean numbers with bases that aren't integers. Is this right?

I've never encountered such a thing before, so I'm curious about it. I've only seen bases defined as integers - is it valid to think of non-integral bases? Do the same processes for understanding and converting integer bases apply to non-integers?

I have no specific questions, really. How does it work? How is it meaningful? What are some applications of it? Links to further information would be nice.

Searching the web turns up almost no information about this, so I wonder if it goes by any other names too.

Thanks to anyone who can shed some light on the matter. :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, I believe it's problematic. Imagine taking base \pi. Then \pi would have a finite \pi-ary expansion. What's worse is that it doesn't make sense to use decimals in this case. When you have a base n, then the digits in your expansion can take values from {0, 1, .., n-1}. What if you have base \pi? There's no reasonable choice.
 
This can be done.
call our base b
1234(base b)=1*b^3+2*b^2+3*b+a
as usual digits are chosen as integers such that 0<=digit<=b
any positive real except one can be used as a base.
The two main problems that arise are
1) accuracy can become an issue and rational numbers have not reapeating decimal expansions.
2) non uniqueness. This has to do with algebraic bases.
2=10=1.01010101010101010101... (base sqrt(2))
4=10000=100=11.010000010010... (base sqrt(2))
here are some things in base pi
pi=10 (base pi)
e=2.2021201002111122001 (base pi)
17=120.2200211010202300
 
AKG said:
No, I believe it's problematic. Imagine taking base \pi. Then \pi would have a finite \pi-ary expansion. What's worse is that it doesn't make sense to use decimals in this case. When you have a base n, then the digits in your expansion can take values from {0, 1, .., n-1}. What if you have base \pi? There's no reasonable choice.
pi=10 (base pi) is not a problem
Even though the base is nonintegral the digits are still integers.
 
but the concept raises an interesting question : what can you say about a number which has a periodic development in base pi ?
such as a = 1.0101010101(base pi) = pi+pi^3+pi^5+...
it is tempting to name those numbers "rationals in base pi"
However, they look like p-adic numbers, because of the infinite right part.
They also look like elements of an hilbert space, or infinite polynomials in pi

what about addition, multiplication, ... of those numbers ? is there a closed operation ?
 
Thread 'How to define a vector field?'
Hello! In one book I saw that function ##V## of 3 variables ##V_x, V_y, V_z## (vector field in 3D) can be decomposed in a Taylor series without higher-order terms (partial derivative of second power and higher) at point ##(0,0,0)## such way: I think so: higher-order terms can be neglected because partial derivative of second power and higher are equal to 0. Is this true? And how to define vector field correctly for this case? (In the book I found nothing and my attempt was wrong...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K