In General
Let be an integral domain and the (Archimedean) absolute value on it.
A number in this positional number system is represented as an expansion
- , where
– the radix (or base) with ,
– exponent (position or place)
– digits from the finite set of digits usually with . The cardinality is called the level of decomposition.
A positional number system or coding system is a pair
with radix and set of digits, and we write the standard set of digits with digits as
- .
Desirable are coding systems with the features
- Every number in, e. g. the Gaussian integers, is uniquely representable as a finite code, possibly with a sign.
- Every number in is representable as an infinite code, where the series converges under for, and the measure of the set of numbers with more than one representation is 0. The latter requires that the set be minimal, i. e. .
In this notation our standard decimal coding scheme is denoted by
- ,
the standard binary system is
- ,
the negabinary system is
- ,
and the balanced ternary system is
- .
All these coding systems have the mentioned features for and, and the latter two do not require a sign.
Well-known positional number systems for the complex numbers include the following ( being the imaginary unit):
- , e. g. and
- , the quater-imaginary base, proposed by Donald Knuth in 1955.
- and
- (see also the section Base −1± below).
- , where, and is a positive integer that can take multiple values at a given . For and this is the system
- .
- ;
- , where the set consists of complex numbers, and numbers, e. g.
- .
- , where
Read more about this topic: Complex Base Systems
Famous quotes containing the word general:
“You dont want a general houseworker, do you? Or a traveling companion, quiet, refined, speaks fluent French entirely in the present tense? Or an assistant billiard-maker? Or a private librarian? Or a lady car-washer? Because if you do, I should appreciate your giving me a trial at the job. Any minute now, I am going to become one of the Great Unemployed. I am about to leave literature flat on its face. I dont want to review books any more. It cuts in too much on my reading.”
—Dorothy Parker (18931967)
“We ought, says Kant, to become acquainted with the instrument, before we undertake the work for which it is to be employed; for if the instrument be insufficient, all our trouble will be spent in vain. The plausibility of this suggestion has won for it general assent and admiration.... But the examination can be only carried out by an act of knowledge. To examine this so-called instrument is the same as to know it.”
—Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (17701831)