Re: Abolish Fractions?
- From: The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 07:32:02 -0800
In sci.math, rich burge
<r3769@xxxxxxx>
wrote
on Sat, 2 Feb 2008 17:06:30 -0800 (PST)
<44962040-ce79-456a-a56d-5a83054e3484@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
On Jan 31, 3:07 am, quasi <qu...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Which of these is more beautiful?
(1/8) / (2/3)
.125 / .667
If you choose the second one, all I can say is "Beauty is in the eye
of the beholder".
Having made a serious (and painfully long) study of the poster of
decimal conversions on the wall of Mrs. White's seventh grade math
class, I must confess that, to this day, I find the decimal equivalent
of 91/128 to be quite beautiful. Kind of a weird aesthetic for a
student of the "new math", I know.
Rich
0.7109375 = "Sleb oil" upside down? I'll admit it's interesting. :-)
Admittedly, 1/3 = 0.4 in base 12. That's kinda pretty. ;-)
Too bad almost no one uses base 12.
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
Windows. The choice of a bunch of people who like very weird behavior on
a regular basis, random crashes, and "extend, embrace, and extinguish".
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Abolish Fractions?
- From: rich burge
- Re: Abolish Fractions?
- References:
- Re: Abolish Fractions?
- From: rich burge
- Re: Abolish Fractions?
- Prev by Date: Re: compactness in angels/devil problem
- Next by Date: Solutions Manuals and more - Accounting, Finance, Taxation
- Previous by thread: Re: Abolish Fractions?
- Next by thread: Re: Abolish Fractions?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
