Standard notation needed for binary numbers as exponents

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the need for a standardized notation for representing binary numbers, particularly focusing on operations such as multiplication and division. Participants explore various notational systems and their implications for clarity and efficiency in mathematical operations involving binary numbers.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant uses the notation {3,1,0} to represent binary numbers and expresses difficulty with division in this format.
  • Another participant suggests using hexadecimal notation as an alternative, indicating that it could simplify operations.
  • Concerns are raised about the clarity of operations when using the proposed notation, likening it to Roman numerals.
  • Some participants argue that traditional binary notation (e.g., 1011) is widely understood and conveys the same information as the proposed notation.
  • There is a suggestion to use a -1 in the notation for division to clarify operations.
  • A participant mentions their work involves programming a PowerMod function and factoring large numbers, which necessitates efficient arithmetic operations on binary numbers.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness and clarity of the proposed notation compared to traditional binary and hexadecimal representations. There is no consensus on a preferred notation, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach for representing binary operations.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in their proposed notations, including potential confusion in arithmetic operations and the need for clarity when dealing with large binary numbers. The discussion reflects varying assumptions about the audience's familiarity with different notational systems.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those working with binary arithmetic, computer programming, or mathematical notation, particularly in contexts involving large integers or efficiency in computation.

coolul007
Gold Member
Messages
271
Reaction score
8
I work a lot in binary. I am organizing some of my work and need a way to write expressions. I can always create my own notation, but i would rather not invent something that already exists.
1011 is binary for 11 base 10. I use this {3,1,0} to represent the binary with just exponents. When I multiply this is the notation I use: {3,1,0}(1) ={4,2,1} This is ok , but division is awkward, {4,2,1}/(1) = {3,1,0} Any help will be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Actually, I was looking for a better way to show the operation of multiplication and division. I didn't make that clear
 
whats wrong with using the arithmetic operators and hex notation?

0xA * 0xB = 10 * 11 = 110 = 0x6E
 
do you also have a problem when you multiply with a non power of two number

(3,1,0) * (3,1,0) = (3,1,0) * 3 + (3,1,0) * 1 + (3,1,0) * 0 = (6,4,3) + (4,2,1) + (3,1,0) = (6,4,3,2,1,0) ?

It seems like I'm trying to do things in Roman numerals with this notation so I'm sure folks are going to get real confused.

This is just my thought though you should still explore its pros and cons.
 
coolul007 said:
I work a lot in binary. I am organizing some of my work and need a way to write expressions. I can always create my own notation, but i would rather not invent something that already exists.
1011 is binary for 11 base 10. I use this {3,1,0} to represent the binary with just exponents. When I multiply this is the notation I use: {3,1,0}(1) ={4,2,1} This is ok , but division is awkward, {4,2,1}/(1) = {3,1,0} Any help will be appreciated.
What's wrong with 1011 for a (four-bit) binary number? That notation is very widely used, and conveys exactly the same information as your {3, 1, 0} notation. Both forms of notation represent ##1 \times 2^3 + 0 \times 2^2 + 1 \times 2^1 + 1 \times 2^0##. The former notation writes the coefficients, and keeps track of the exponents by the position in the bitstring. Your notation keeps track of the exponents of the terms with nonzero coefficients.
 
coolul007 said:
Actually, I was looking for a better way to show the operation of multiplication and division. I didn't make that clear
Using bitstrings (as in the usual notation for binary numbers) multiplication is performed analogously with how it is performed in decimal arithmetic when multidigit numbers are multiplied. The only facts that are needed though, are 0 * 0 = 0, 0 * 1 = 1, 1 * 0 = 0, and 1 * 1 = 1. Division also works analogously with how it is performed with decimal numbers.
 
Time to end this thread. I am not interested in binary vs other bases,etc. I wanted to know if there existed notation analgous to set theory for strictly dealing with operations on exponents. I chose binary as there are no coefficients. This makes operating with numbers, quicker and more straight forward. I am also working with very large integers, thousands to millions of bits. On average eliminating the zero bits cuts the work in half.
 
What if in your notation you used a -1 for the division?

What kind of work are you doing that requires arithmetic operations on very large binary numbers?
 
  • #10
I'm programming a PowerMod function and factoring large numbers. PowerMod requires squaring of numbers. Squaring is a "pig" operation with large numbers in a computer. The key is to make the operation as quick as possible. The notation question arises because to explain my squaring method I needed something to demonstrate the method in a paper. It is easy to program without notation, I was just wondering if such notation already existed. I can always continue using my own.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K