Hacker Read

shalabhc · 2017-06-22 20:37:30+00:00

1 also belongs to 'all integers from 1 through 10'. Is this also a category? (I assume yes). How is this category expressed in Luna?

ftxbro | karma 3756 | avg karma 1.71 · | 2023-09-25 18:35:59

some of it is integer

parfe | karma 5534 | avg karma 5.2 · | 2013-03-02 19:21:46+00:00

In a way that an integer is not?

pfortuny | karma 5607 | avg karma 2.46 · | 2013-06-28 02:49:34

Ah, yes. But I was thinking of all the integers.

I know, I should have read the OP but I was too lazy.

Really cheeky, though :)

reply

sukuriant | karma 2246 | avg karma 1.6 · | 2012-10-09 03:23:04+00:00

... I was using that nomenclature for the short hand of "inclusive/exclusive". 1 to 9 exclusive is 1 to 8 in the integer set. Sorry for the lack of clarity. Perhaps now we can get to my original point?

paulddraper | karma 16686 | avg karma 1.72 · | 2024-05-20 17:03:10

1 is an integer, a rational number, a positive integer, an odd integer, a power of 2, etc.

pg_is_a_butt | karma -32 | avg karma -0.03 · | 2019-12-02 21:56:14+00:00

All numbers are equal to 1 in a number base of themselves.

moioci | karma 807 | avg karma 3.31 · | 2024-06-21 22:09:16

My bad. I was thinking A, B, and C were integers.

noselasd | karma 2714 | avg karma 2.31 · | 2018-10-30 21:21:21+00:00

well, 2.1 isn't an integer.

mellavora | karma 3837 | avg karma 2.61 · | 2021-11-30 03:37:54

or even restrict to integers?

Then we can all be in the club!

reply

btilly | karma 52813 | avg karma 4.93 · | 2012-09-22 22:33:45+00:00

Oops, I meant integers form a group. Minor mistake.

cma | karma 10501 | avg karma 1.7 · | 2013-05-11 17:07:14+00:00

It shouldn't be a subclass of int. http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9205211

seppel | karma 710 | avg karma 2.33 · | 2019-12-04 22:14:43+00:00

> yet must represent numbers from 10^38

No, they don't must represent all number in the range. I don't know where you get from that they must. An integer also can't represent all real numbers in its range.

reply

mtklein | karma 529 | avg karma 7.56 · | 2022-07-17 23:57:03

I think you maybe meant to say “integer”?

LudwigNagasena | karma 4374 | avg karma 2.6 · | 2024-06-21 17:26:11

There is a 1-to-1 mapping between integers and rationals.

ColinWright | karma 127421 | avg karma 8.1 · | 2019-04-28 21:29:03

But we're working in the integers, so 1/2, for example, doesn't exist.

Jabbles | karma 5119 | avg karma 3.66 · | 2010-12-04 14:49:00+00:00

Well obviously. That idea is not (IMO) worthy of a news post. But it doesn't say that the integers are distinct. I'd be interested to hear if it was possible to store numbers in general better than above.

tirpen | karma 789 | avg karma 4.43 · | 2023-04-20 02:10:58

Yes. (1,1) is a pair of integers, and so is (17,17). Why wouldn't they be?

nl | karma 29762 | avg karma 2.49 · | 2021-04-04 09:21:27+00:00

It's legal for both cardinal and ordinal numbers, as well as slightly more exotic number types.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_plus_one

reply

kolbe | karma 3215 | avg karma 2.08 · | 2020-02-29 19:03:41+00:00

Does everyone understand something I don’t about #1? It never said they were unique integers.