Newsgroups: sci.physics,sci.math,comp.ai
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!gatech!howland.reston.ans.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!world!jhallen
From: jhallen@world.std.com (Joseph H Allen)
Subject: Re: Are integers rational? Are rationals real?
Message-ID: <DE6M8u.2y4@world.std.com>
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
References: <41cq12$sar@csnews.cs.colorado.edu> <scottb.809198080@elvis.wri.com> <420g72$qrl@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 15:41:18 GMT
Lines: 26
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.physics:137948 sci.math:116202 comp.ai:33013

In article <420g72$qrl@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>,
Antonio Ramirez <anto@mit.edu> wrote:
>scottb@elvis.wri.com wrote:

>:   Not that I disagree strongly with you, but I'd not say that what you
>:   describe is a "fallacy" of computer science.

>I think the real fallacy lies in believing that computers can
>actualy handle real numbers.

Computers can handle lots of real numbers: sqrt(2), sqrt(3), e, pi, 3, etc. 
Of course, they, like humans, have to handle them symbolically.  Try
sin(%pi) in macsyma, for example.  Certain programs even handle
differentials, infinities and imaginary numbers.

>They can only work with rational numbers, so the term "real" as used in
>informatics contexts is just a technical word referring to a special way of
>representing rational numbers.

Only PASCAL claims to have 'real's.  Other, more honest languages have
'float's
-- 
/*  jhallen@world.std.com (192.74.137.5) */               /* Joseph H. Allen */
int a[1817];main(z,p,q,r){for(p=80;q+p-80;p-=2*a[p])for(z=9;z--;)q=3&(r=time(0)
+r*57)/7,q=q?q-1?q-2?1-p%79?-1:0:p%79-77?1:0:p<1659?79:0:p>158?-79:0,q?!a[p+q*2
]?a[p+=a[p+=q]=q]=q:0:0;for(;q++-1817;)printf(q%79?"%c":"%c\n"," #"[!a[q-1]]);}
