[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>*Subject*: Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0*From*: John Cowan <cowan@x>*Date*: Sat, 22 Dec 2012 01:23:14 -0500*Cc*: scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>*In-reply-to*: <87licqr5jz.fsf@tines.lan>*References*: <20121219221955.GH4477@mercury.ccil.org> <87d2y5y6fb.fsf@tines.lan> <20121221055315.GB28661@mercury.ccil.org> <87y5grsrvm.fsf@tines.lan> <CAMMPzYMQVzkQFLsgcYAWZaFO__Y13T_kOXD+CrLqVXPQOcjXGw@mail.gmail.com> <20121221171601.GC23915@mercury.ccil.org> <CAMMPzYO5m64sWGQT2b7SSPbm=zRbVT4oEx8E-DoLLATNZxtj_w@mail.gmail.com> <20121222024255.GH8521@mercury.ccil.org> <CAMMPzYOtVMoyiE=ToLHvmNf=Lbq_FOE9v9CcrZoBrcdB_mnoVQ@mail.gmail.com> <87licqr5jz.fsf@tines.lan>

Mark H Weaver scripsit: > So can your proposed inexacts. In order to avoid underflow and > overflow, the number of representable values cannot be finite, because > there can be no maximum or minimum representable magnitude. Therefore > the amount of memory needed to represent your numbers is unbounded. No > matter how clever your compression method is, that fact is unavoidable. In principle, yes. But if you can represent Skewes's number in five or six words, the likelihood of ever reaching the physical limit is much, much less. -- I Hope, Sir, that we are not John Cowan mutually Un-friended by this cowan@x Difference which hath happened http://www.ccil.org/~cowan betwixt us. --Thomas Fuller, Appeal of Injured Innocence (1659) _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

**References**:**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Alex Shinn <alexshinn@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Next by Date:
**[Scheme-reports] Implied equality** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Next by thread:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Index(es):