2885
logical (lemmy.world)
submitted 3 years ago by [M] to c/nathanwpyle@lemmy.world
467 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

providing an arbitrarily non-reduced fraction is an even sillier alternative. the same fundamental issue arises either way, and it’s much clearer to use obvious semantics that everyone can understand

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago

    It's not the same issue at all.

    How do you represent 1/64th in decimal without implying greater or lesser precision? Or 1/3rd? Or 1/2 or literally anything that isn't a power of 10?

    You're defending the practice of saying "this number, but maybe not because we can't actually measure that precisely, so here's some more numbers you can use to figure out how precise or measurements are"

    How is that a more elegant solution than simply having the precision recorded in a single rational measurement?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent