MidAtlantic Retro Computing Hobbyists is a Restricted Group with 479 members.
 MidAtlantic Retro Computing Hobbyists

 Restricted Group,
 479 members
Primary Navigation
Re: [midatlanticretro] Re: Today is 11111
 0 Attachment
On Nov 1, 2011 8:41 AM, "Mike Hatch" <mike@...> wrote:
>
> And next Friday will be 77.
><two's comp mode>
It's 1 Day
Or, Euler's Identity Day, e^(i*pi)= 1
Or even, Complex Number Day, x^2= 1The holiest of numbers ;)
And both days this month, actually
=Dan
</two's comp mode> 0 Attachment
Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>It's 1 Day
How do you figure? You haven't identified the field. Neither would be
>
>Or, Euler's Identity Day, e^(i*pi)= 1 Or even, Complex Number
>Day, x^2= 1
>
>The holiest of numbers ;)
>
>And both days this month, actually
negative on most modern byte designated architectures nor in most of the
typed languages. Are you a BLISS coder? ;)
And I believe that Euler's Identity is e^(i*Pi) 1 = 0 relating all of
the five fundamental mathematical constants. 0 Attachment
On Nov 1, 2011 10:25 AM, <system@...> wrote:
>
> Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>
> >It's 1 Day
> >
> >Or, Euler's Identity Day, e^(i*pi)= 1 Or even, Complex Number
> >Day, x^2= 1
> >
> >The holiest of numbers ;)
> >
> >And both days this month, actually
>
> How do you figure? You haven't identified the field. Neither would be
> negative on most modern byte designated architectures nor in most of the
> typed languages. Are you a BLISS coder? ;)
>It's all relative. The Binary number system has no restrictive fields. Binary can be any length. It's first a mathematical number system, before you ever define a computer system. That's why you don't see leading zeros. You must be a real party pooper ;)
> And I believe that Euler's Identity is e^(i*Pi) 1 = 0 relating all of
> the five fundamental mathematical constants.
>Ehhem, RTFM
e^(i*Pi) +1 = 0
Before you use the inverse property 0 Attachment
Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>On Nov 1, 2011 10:25 AM, <system@...> wrote: > > Dan
But in number theory and abstract algebra, you need a field to interpret
>Roganti <ragooman@...> writes: > > >It's 1 Day > > > >Or,
>Euler's Identity Day, e^(i*pi)= 1 Or even, Complex Number > >Day,
>x^2= 1 > > > >The holiest of numbers ;) > > > >And both days this
>month, actually > > How do you figure? You haven't identified the
>field. Neither would be > negative on most modern byte designated
>architectures nor in most of the > typed languages. Are you a BLISS
>coder? ;) >
>
>It's all relative. The Binary number system has no restrictive fields.
>Binary can be any length. It's first a mathematical number system,
>before you ever define a computer system. That's why you don't see
>leading zeros. You must be a real party pooper ;)
your value and or apply any field axioms. So, I guess what I'm trying to
understand is how 11111 and 111111 are equivalent. ;)
>> And I believe that Euler's Identity is e^(i*Pi) 1 = 0 relating all of
Oops. I had typed that and then move the value over so as not to confuse
>> the five fundamental mathematical constants. >
>
>Ehhem, RTFM e^(i*Pi) +1 = 0 Before you use the inverse property
it being past of the exponental group.
Back to replacing a horked Fibre Channel controller. 0 Attachment
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:17 AM, <system@...> wrote:Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:But in number theory and abstract algebra, you need a field to interpret
>On Nov 1, 2011 10:25 AM, <system@...> wrote: > > Dan
>Roganti <ragooman@...> writes: > > >It's 1 Day > > > >Or,
>Euler's Identity Day, e^(i*pi)= 1 Or even, Complex Number > >Day,
>x^2= 1 > > > >The holiest of numbers ;) > > > >And both days this
>month, actually > > How do you figure? You haven't identified the
>field. Neither would be > negative on most modern byte designated
>architectures nor in most of the > typed languages. Are you a BLISS
>coder? ;) >
>
>It's all relative. The Binary number system has no restrictive fields.
>Binary can be any length. It's first a mathematical number system,
>before you ever define a computer system. That's why you don't see
>leading zeros. You must be a real party pooper ;)
your value and or apply any field axioms. So, I guess what I'm trying to
understand is how 11111 and 111111 are equivalent. ;)Because you're still thinking in Flip Flops. There's no rule saying you can't use 5bits. Also, you don't need any hardware to use Binary math  paper works just fine  or to make this joke work ;)I think the term "Field Axiom" in number theory can be misconstrued  the word 'Field' doesn't elude to FlipFlops, thus, octal or hex coding. The origin is called Axioms whenever you postulate when using math.=Dan 0 Attachment
Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>Because you're still thinking in Flip Flops. There's no rule saying you
Flipflops? Me. I realize that you can use 5 bits; hence, my comment
>can't use 5bits. Also, you don't need any hardware to use Binary math
> paper works just fine  or to make this joke work ;)
WRT BLISS. ;)
>I think the term "Field Axiom" in number theory can be misconstrued 
I don't understand where your FlipFlops comes into this nor have you
>the word 'Field' doesn't elude to FlipFlops, thus, octal or hex coding.
>The origin is called Axioms whenever you postulate when using math.
answered how 11111 = 111111. 0 Attachment
On Nov 1, 2011 12:47 PM, <system@...> wrote:
> I don't understand where your FlipFlops comes into this nor have you
> answered how 11111 = 111111.
>Because it's a joke, remember, its when your supposed to laugh ;)
Twos Complement is not bound to any field, or number coding on whatever system. It's how you implement it in hardware.
The only rule (in shorthand) to get 2's Comp is simply
1. Invert Binary Number
2. Add 111/1/11: 11111 is 5bit binary math  and it's still 1
11/11/11: 111111 is 6bit binary math  and it's also 1The two have no logic, digital, or electronic system in common  its just math.
=Dan
 0 Attachment
Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>On Nov 1, 2011 12:47 PM, <system@...> wrote:
7(dec)+1(dec) is 8(dec)
>
>> I don't understand where your FlipFlops comes into this nor have you
>> answered how 11111 = 111111. >
>
>Because it's a joke, remember, its when your supposed to laugh ;)
>
>Twos Complement is not bound to any field, or number coding on whatever
>system. It's how you implement it in hardware.
>
>The only rule (in shorthand) to get 2's Comp is simply 1. Invert Binary
>Number 2. Add 1
111(bin)+1(bin) is 1000(bin).
8 or 8???
2's comp is a contrivance and has nothing to do with implementation in
hardware.
So, what you're saying is that if I add enough to 'n' it will eventually
become negative? I don't remember the number line folding back. 0 Attachment
On Nov 1, 2011 2:58 PM, <system@...> wrote:
>>
> 7(dec)+1(dec) is 8(dec)
>
> 111(bin)+1(bin) is 1000(bin).
>
> 8 or 8???Dude, did you get any sleep???
When one specifies a size, in this case 5bit >>and<< signed integers (namely 2's comp), your number range is limited from
(2^(n1)) to (2^(n1))1
Unless of course, you intend to use doubles(or any multiple)  but then it still applies>
> 2's comp is a contrivance and has nothing to do with implementation in
> hardware.jeesh, we know who failed Digital 101 now do we ;)
Don't tell me, did you actually build an Full Adder >>and<< Subtractor Logic inside your ALU for class ??Two's Complement is the main reason you don't need extra hardware for Subtractor logic. You simply use Adder Logic only  even in Multipliers/Dividers. And so became the prevailing dominant method  among several reasons  over other signed integer notation, such as, Signed Magnitude, One's Comp, etc  beginning in the early 60's.
Even DEC knew that ;)=Dan
 0 Attachment
On 11/01/2011 04:10 PM, Dan Roganti wrote:> Two's Complement is the main reason you don't need extra hardware for
Hey. HEY. Watch it there, mister! ;)
> Subtractor logic. You simply use Adder Logic only  even in
> Multipliers/Dividers. And so became the prevailing dominant method 
> among several reasons  over other signed integer notation, such as,
> Signed Magnitude, One's Comp, etc  beginning in the early 60's.
> Even DEC knew that ;)

Dave McGuire
New Kensington, PA 0 Attachment
Dan Roganti <ragooman@...> writes:
>On Nov 1, 2011 2:58 PM, <system@...> wrote: >
Were did one specify the size? We're back at my first post.
>
>> > 7(dec)+1(dec) is 8(dec) > > 111(bin)+1(bin) is 1000(bin). > > 8 or
>8???
>
>Dude, did you get any sleep??? When one specifies a size, in this case
>5bit >>and<< signed integers (namely 2's comp), your number range is
No shite sherlock but I don't have to treat that addition as producing
>limited from (2^(n1)) to (2^(n1))1 Unless of course, you intend to
>use doubles(or any multiple)  but then it still applies
>
>> > 2's comp is a contrivance and has nothing to do with implementation
>in > hardware.
>
>jeesh, we know who failed Digital 101 now do we ;) Don't tell me, did
>you actually build an Full Adder >>and<< Subtractor Logic inside your
>ALU for class ??
>
>Two's Complement is the main reason you don't need extra hardware for
>Subtractor logic. You simply use Adder Logic only  even in
>Multipliers/Dividers. And so became the prevailing dominant method 
>among several reasons  over other signed integer notation, such as,
a negative. I'm perfectly happy, with my example, to continue counting
to 15 (1111) and then start it all over again. Of course, I'd generate
an OVERFLOW exception or set some overflow flag/status bit but I don't
necessarily have to. And, yes, I do understand digital logic... 1000
is not negative unless I intend to treat it as negative. Hence, it's a
contrivance.
>Signed Magnitude, One's Comp, etc  beginning in the early 60's. Even
where and why did they have to do with this?
>DEC knew that ;)
 0 Attachment
On Nov 1, 2011 4:33 PM, <system@...> wrote:
>
>
> No shite sherlock
>Dude,
Today is 11111 ;)