flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

 Index > Heap > Programmer's Clock Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author
Yardman

Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 245
Location: US
Yardman
[ Post removed by author. ]

Last edited by Yardman on 04 Apr 2012, 03:35; edited 1 time in total
14 Oct 2008, 01:06
revolution
When all else fails, read the source

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17271
revolution
Programmer? Or maybe a mathematician's clock? Maxwell Smart and agent 999's clock?
14 Oct 2008, 05:02
ManOfSteel

Joined: 02 Feb 2005
Posts: 1154
ManOfSteel
It's so straightforward. I like that.
14 Oct 2008, 07:14
HyperVista

Joined: 18 Apr 2005
Posts: 691
Location: Virginia, USA
HyperVista
Very cool clock Yardman!
Here's another programmer's clock:
Binary Clock
14 Oct 2008, 13:05
Picnic

Joined: 05 May 2007
Posts: 1288
Location: behind the arc
Picnic
A nice Dos pillow, i love it

Found here
14 Oct 2008, 17:02
windwakr

Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 827
Location: Michigan, USA
windwakr
can anyone explain what the ones for 7 and 9 are?

EDIT: Is that .999999 supposed to be one?I don't see why so many people think that....

_________________
----> * <---- My star, won HERE

Last edited by windwakr on 14 Oct 2008, 22:41; edited 1 time in total
14 Oct 2008, 22:21
LocoDelAssembly

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina
LocoDelAssembly
Quote:

I don't see why so many people think that....

Here are several proofs of that fact. If you are like me at least one of them will convince you
14 Oct 2008, 22:33
windwakr

Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 827
Location: Michigan, USA
windwakr
I was looking at that page after I posted, I still don't believe .99999 is 1....and I don't care what anyone says...

Edit:
that one explanation labeled "digit manipulation" is just silly, it tries to show x=.¯9 so 10x=9.¯9 then 10x-x=9 so 9x=9,thus x=1...but .999.... to any amount times 9 is 8.999.......

WOOOOO, my 2^7'th post!

EDIT2:

It's just as bad as people believing 9 divided by 9 is .¯9

Last edited by windwakr on 14 Oct 2008, 23:02; edited 4 times in total
14 Oct 2008, 22:35
LocoDelAssembly

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina
LocoDelAssembly
The proof with fractions wasn't convincing enough? I remember that it was that proof that convinced me of the non uniqueness of the decimal (and other integer bases) number representation, which, BTW, I've learnt all this less than a year ago
14 Oct 2008, 22:46
vid
Verbosity in development

Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7105
Location: Slovakia
vid
Quote:
proof that convinced me of the non uniqueness of the decimal

Sorry, i probably missed most of this thing, and my theoretical math knowledge is very poor (even though many people told my me my theoretical math talents are high),but... why did you think that decimal system was unique, in first place?

I don't see so much difference between numeric base with ********** (10) symbols, and numeric base with ** (2) symbols, or base with *** (3) symbols, or base with ******* (7) symbols, etc...
14 Oct 2008, 23:41
LocoDelAssembly

Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4633
Location: Argentina
LocoDelAssembly
Quote:

why did you think that decimal system was unique, in first place?

You should have quoted me up to the comma

Anyway, what I've tried to say was that in a given integer base number representation system, a given number does not have an unique representation. Before knowing that a0.(9) is a0+1, I though that every number had a SINGLE representation on a given representation system, not that every number has the very same representation in any system (is this what you though I was thinking?)
15 Oct 2008, 00:15
revolution
When all else fails, read the source

Joined: 24 Aug 2004
Posts: 17271
revolution
Some cultures only have three numbers: 0, 1 and lots. I think we should teach our computers just these three numbers only.

With parentheses meaning repeating decimals:
0.(1)=1/9
0.(2)=2/9
0.(3)=3/9
0.(4)=4/9
0.(5)=5/9
0.(6)=6/9
0.(7)=7/9
0.(8)=8/9
0.(9)=9/9
15 Oct 2008, 00:24
tom tobias

Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
vid wrote:
...many people told my me my theoretical math talents are high...
I have lived a fortunate life: no one ever has accused me of possessing any kind of theoretical understanding of any subject.

I realize how unsophisticated I am, when looking at this clock, for I cannot decipher the numeral five.

Square root of 9, ok, got that: it is 3.
Now, comes an exclamation mark. I have no idea what that represents. In C programming, I believe, and may be in error, as usual, that this symbol corresponds to the Boolean "NOT" function. Perhaps here there is some other convention, I am simply unaware of.
Of course, even I can recognize that 9/9 = 1. So, it becomes 3 ! - 1. How do we obtain five from that? Oh, you mean that the Exclamation mark is also a symbol used to represent factorial! Ah, ok, got it.
(3 * 2 * 1) - 1. Wow. What a chore. Holy cow.

15 Oct 2008, 03:19
shoorick

Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
not sure if binary clock (pointed by HyperVista) is good at darkness
+++ unless blinking right bottom point is enough good ruler
2++ it would be better if zero also were indicated, say, 0 - yellow (darker), 1 - blue (and brighter)

that clock i made at 1986, when i was a schoolboy:

when i live in the students hostel, it was a problem when cocrouch entered clock and sitting somewhere at indicator, damaging displayed number look from a distance

_________________
UNICODE forever!
15 Oct 2008, 05:41
shoorick

Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
11 Feb 2009, 09:18
TmX

Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 821
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
TmX
windwakr wrote:
9 are?

9 raised to the 9th power, then find the 9th root.
you'll get a 9
11 Feb 2009, 10:09
Borsuc

Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 2466
Location: Bucharest, Romania
Borsuc
tom tobias wrote:
I have lived a fortunate life: no one ever has accused me of possessing any kind of theoretical understanding of any subject.
That is an accusation, something bad for you?

tom tobias wrote:
Of course, even I can recognize that 9/9 = 1. So, it becomes 3 ! - 1. How do we obtain five from that? Oh, you mean that the Exclamation mark is also a symbol used to represent factorial! Ah, ok, got it.
(3 * 2 * 1) - 1. Wow. What a chore. Holy cow.

AFAIK that's the symbol used in math, so at least you should know the standards before considering it a chore

_________________
Previously known as The_Grey_Beast
11 Feb 2009, 17:21
guignol

Joined: 06 Dec 2008
Posts: 701
guignol
shoorick wrote:
that clock i made at 1986, when i was a schoolboy:

when i live in the students hostel, it was a problem when cocrouch entered clock and sitting somewhere at indicator, damaging displayed number look from a distance
Finally grow up, dude!
16 Feb 2009, 19:00
shoorick

Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Posts: 1605
Location: Ukraine
shoorick
update your bios to extend OCR capabilities
17 Feb 2009, 12:19
windwakr

Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 827
Location: Michigan, USA
windwakr
the line above the 9? that means it goes on forever, to make .9999999999999.....
18 Feb 2009, 03:14
 Display posts from previous: All Posts1 Day7 Days2 Weeks1 Month3 Months6 Months1 Year Oldest FirstNewest First

 Jump to: Select a forum Official----------------AssemblyPeripheria General----------------MainDOSWindowsLinuxUnixMenuetOS Specific----------------MacroinstructionsCompiler InternalsIDE DevelopmentOS ConstructionNon-x86 architecturesHigh Level LanguagesProgramming Language DesignProjects and IdeasExamples and Tutorials Other----------------FeedbackHeapTest Area
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next

Forum Rules:
 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou can attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum