Re:The Ring-a-Ding Numeration System by Jim Henle
by whatshisface on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @02:29AM
(#30915898)
It's not binary because all of the intermediate results shown during the videos are also valid numbers. It's actually an (upside down so as not to spoil it for anyone) ˙ǝuo ɟo uoıʇıppɐ ʇuǝsǝɹdǝɹ sʇop ǝɥʇ puɐ 'oʍʇ ʎq pǝıןdıʇןnɯ sʇuǝʇuoɔ ǝɥʇ ɥʇıʍ sısǝɥʇuǝɹɐd ʇuǝsǝɹdǝɹ sǝןɔɹıɔ ǝɹǝɥʍ uoıssǝɹdxǝ ɔıʇǝɯɥʇıɹ∀
Re:The Ring-a-Ding Numeration System by Jim Henle
by taejo on Wednesday April 06, 2022 @02:43AM
(#30929131)
From the article:
> The rings must be nested. The innermost ring must have a ding. No region can have more than one ding. Those are the only rules.
According to these rules the intermediate results are not valid numbers
a ring is 0
a ring,ding is 1
The ring represents a doubling of its contents. The special case for the leading bit could be avoided by always having an innermost empty ring. That would also give you a better (i.e. visible) representation for 0. The addition rule ensures that you always have exactly 1 leading 0.