# Why are numbers between 0 and 1 fractions?

## Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, joigus said:

That's probably because you're ready to ignore all answers and keep diverting into new questions.

Case in point. Is that a question, or word origami?

No, the number is geometry based, and it looks like it's in 3d looks like oragami..

On another note, I'm seeking legal advice on cyber bullying...There are some members here that are purposely creating problems for me making it very hard for a scientific conversation..

##### Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, CuriosOne said:

There are some members here that are purposely creating problems for me making it very hard for a scientific conversation.

You are the one who making a scientific discussion difficult, if not impossible.

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CuriosOne said:

On another note, I'm seeking legal advice on cyber bullying...There are some members here that are purposely creating problems for me making it very hard for a scientific conversation..

Although nothing would amuse me more than the picture of you being preyed upon by legal counsellors, I'd advice you to think it twice.

In a previous post you bitterly complained about not being offered a job, as some kind of reward for your brilliant thinking. Set your priorities right, is all I can say. I don't wish you any wrong, in spite of your misled smugness and total disregard of the efforts of many users trying to help you to the best of their --our-- abilities.

The bullying that you mention is about a post by @iNow on another thread that didn't even mention you.

I almost forgot: numbers are not geometrically motivated. They come first. You can study their properties with topology --a basis of neighbourhoods-- or with geometry --distance, metric--. If you have n-tuples of numbers, then you can introduce angles, also from the metric.

Edited by joigus

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, joigus said:

That's probably because you're ready to ignore all answers and keep diverting into new questions.

Case in point. Is that a question, or word origami?

Yes its a question, "any base system"  works, as any base system can be created out of thin air...The better one or more efficient is the winner..

So why doesn't anyone tell me this?

I'm not concerned about binary numbers, computers and etc...This did not exist long ago when science was being formulated...I feel sorry for today's students that need to deal with this "simple" issue.

##### Share on other sites

"Why are numbers between 0 and 1 fractions?"
Because they are what you get if you take a whole something, and fracture it.

##### Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, CuriosOne said:

So why doesn't anyone tell me this?

Because you couldn't be farther off the mark. That's not what bases are about. I and others have been telling you until we're blue in the mouth.

You're using the oldest trick of the game, which is non-sequitur. It's as if someone tells you,

"Mountains arise from mechanical tensions and thermal processes in the Earth's interior"

and you say,

"Then why are elephants winged creatures?"

1st) Elephants are not winged creatures (a false premise embedded in a question is called a sophism)

2nd) The question does not follow from the previous statement at all (that's called a non-sequitur)

If you think for a moment most users here don't see right away what you're trying to do, you're quite wrong.

You're not discussing in good faith. It's not about disagreement. It's about you not being intellectually honest.

You're free to keep playing your game for as long as you want, but you're just calling for action from the mods and very justified annoyance from other users.

Have a good day.

Edited by joigus

##### Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, joigus said:

Although nothing would amuse me more than the picture of you being preyed upon by legal counsellors, I'd advice you to think it twice.

In a previous post you bitterly complained about not being offered a job, as some kind of reward for your brilliant thinking. Set your priorities right, is all I can say. I don't wish you any wrong, in spite of your misled smugness and total disregard of the efforts of many users trying to help you to the best of their --our-- abilities.

The bullying that you mention is about a post by @iNow on another thread that didn't even mention you.

I almost forgot: numbers are not geometrically motivated. They come first. You can study their properties with topology --a basis of neighbourhoods-- or with geometry --distance, metric--. If you have n-tuples of numbers, then you can introduce angles, also from the metric.

Now that I understand that a base numeral system is another word for a

positive integer,  I will research this, however eluded it might be from i as -1 of which we all know is pi ratio based....

The bullying comment was on my thread, so its directed to me however we want to do the algebrea on it....It should not by no means ellude peacfull and civil conversation between adults as it's very childish, especially on something science based...Knowledge varies from person to person for any reason at all, it's what makes life intresting

And i can careless who likes me or not at the end of the day it's just me myself and I.

3 minutes ago, joigus said:

Because you couldn't be farther off the mark. That's not what bases are about. I and others have been telling you until we're blue in the mouth.

You're using the oldest trick of the game, which is non-sequitur. It's as if someone tells you,

"Mountains arise from mechanical tensions and thermal processes in the Earth's interior"

and you say,

"The why are elephants winged creatures?"

1st) Elephants are not winged creatures (a false premise embedded in a question is called a sophism)

2nd) The question does not follow from the previous statement at all (that's called a non-sequitur)

If you think for a moment most users here don't see right away what you're trying to do, you're quite wrong.

You're not discussing in good faith. It's not about disagreement. It's about you not being intellectually honest.

You're free to keep playing your game for as long as you want, but you're just calling for action from the mods and very justified annoyance from other users.

Have a good day.

I was just told any base numeral system can be created "out of thin air" and that calculus uses no base system...

Who's not discussing in good faith again?

##### Share on other sites

If you feel you’re being bullied, then report the post to staff so they can handle it appropriately

##### Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, CuriosOne said:

No, no, no.

First come numbers.

Then comes topology (neighbourhoods in a set defined by the relation $$\subseteq$$ "contained in")

Then comes geometry (defined by distance, a number assigned to pairs of "points": $$d\left(x,y\right)$$)

From metric (distance) come angles, defined as ratios of distances, as @Sensei has told you.

Topologies are possible to define even when there is no notion of a metric.

Numbers don't have geometry built in them.

You need numbers first. How else could you define the distance, which is a positive number?

Topology is more primitive. You only need a notion of inclusion, open and closed sets, etc.

Closed set: contains its boundary

Open set: does not contain its boundary

Edit: Dimension you can define with vectors (tangent space) or with analysis (number of real variables necessary to describe your set analitically).

And so on...

What a wasted effort!

Edited by joigus

##### Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, joigus said:

No, no, no.

First come numbers.

Then comes topology (neighbourhoods in a set defined by the relation "contained in")

Then comes geometry (defined by distance, a number assigned to pairs of "points": d(x,y) )

From metric (distance) come angles, defined as ratios of distances, as @Sensei has told you.

Topologies are possible to define even when there is no notion of a metric.

Numbers don't have geometry built in them.

You need numbers first. How else could you define the distance, which is a positive number?

Topology is more primitive. You only need a notion of inclusion, open and closed sets, etc.

Closed set: contains its boundary

Open set: does not contain its boundary

Edit: Dimension you can define with vectors (tangent space) or with analysis (number of real variables necessary to describe your set analitically).

And so on...

What a wasted effort!

This sounds more on the line of my insight...It makes better sense, its syncronized information...

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CuriosOne said:

Now that I understand that a base numeral system is another word for a

positive integer,

No.

That's silly.

All poodles are dogs but not all dogs are poodles.
A number base is a positive integer.
But not all positive integers are used as number bases.

1 hour ago, CuriosOne said:

I will research this,

I have already pointed out a good place to start- twice.
It's clear that you are refusing to learn from it  or you are not bright enough to understand it. Which is it?

Why are you stubbornly failing to learn?

##### Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

No.

That's silly.

All poodles are dogs but not all dogs are poodles.
A number base is a positive integer.
But not all positive integers are used as number bases.

I have already pointed out a good place to start- twice.
It's clear that you are refusing to learn from it  or you are not bright enough to understand it. Which is it?

Why are you stubbornly failing to learn?

It's not me, it's the premis of the science model...

Anyone can create a cooridinent system like anyone can creat a "base & numeral system."

I keep asking is base 10

Counting by 10s??

Or is base 2 County by 2s??

Simple as 1 2 3, and I get answer that sound like ""alien technology.""

Edited by CuriosOne

##### Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CuriosOne said:

I keep asking is base 10

Counting by 10s??

Or is base 2 County by 2s??

Simple as 1 2 3, and I get answer that sound like ""alien technology.""

##### Share on other sites
22 hours ago, swansont said:

This was until I knew about the freedom  of cartography and how anyone is free to make one that's reliable..

## Create an account

Register a new account