fossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 1 year agoI just cited myself.mander.xyzimagemessage-square27fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10
arrow-up11arrow-down1imageI just cited myself.mander.xyzfossilesque@mander.xyzM to Science Memes@mander.xyzEnglish · 1 year agomessage-square27fedilink
minus-squarepyre@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 year ago.333… is rational. at least we finally found your problem: you don’t know what rational and irrational mean. the clue is in the name.
minus-squareKlear@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·1 year agoTBH the name is a bit misleading. Same for “real” numbers. And oh so much more so for “normal numbers”.
minus-squarepyre@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·1 year agonot really. i get it because we use rational to mean logical, but that’s not what it means here. yeah, real and normal are stupid names but rational numbers are numbers that can be represented as a ratio of two numbers. i think it’s pretty good.
.333… is rational.
at least we finally found your problem: you don’t know what rational and irrational mean. the clue is in the name.
TBH the name is a bit misleading. Same for “real” numbers. And oh so much more so for “normal numbers”.
not really. i get it because we use rational to mean logical, but that’s not what it means here. yeah, real and normal are stupid names but rational numbers are numbers that can be represented as a ratio of two numbers. i think it’s pretty good.