Re: "Numeric overflow"?
Re: "Numeric overflow"?
- Subject: Re: "Numeric overflow"?
- From: deivy petrescu <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2005 18:48:37 -0400
On Sep 15, 2005, at 11:15, Doug McNutt wrote:
At 20:45 -0400 9/14/05, deivy petrescu wrote:
So, when one says Pi is irrational, one says that Pi is certainly
*not* equal to 22/7.
As long as we're being pedantic, Pi is indeed not rational but it
is also not irrational in the technical jargon of arithmetic - and
perhaps of AppleScript but one never knows. . ..
Oh, pi is irrational in the technical jargon of arithmetic.
An irrational number must be representable as a root of an
algebraic polynomial.
No, this is an algebraic number. 1 is an algebraic number, but
certainly is not irrational.
Pi is not - the circle cannot be squared.
Numbers which are exactly representable only as an infinite series
are said to be transcendental.
Sorry, two different concepts there. Transcendental numbers are
basically non algebraic numbers.
I can represent 1 as an infinite series. 1 continues to be rational!
deivy
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Applescript-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden