Question

(a) The number \(\frac{8}{7}=1.14285714285714 \ldots\) obviously has no exact representation in any decimal floating point system \((\beta=10)\) with finite precision \(t\). Is there a finite floating point system (i.e., some finite integer base \(\beta\) and precision \(t\) ) in which this number does have an exact representation? If yes, then describe such a system. (b) Answer the same question for the irrational number \(\pi\).

Short answer

Short Answer: A finite floating-point system can exactly represent the rational number 8/7, for example, with base β = 7 and any precision t ≥ 1. However, the irrational number π cannot be represented exactly in any finite floating-point system due to its infinite non-repeating decimal representation.

Step-by-step solution

Determine if a finite floating-point system exists for the rational number 8/7

For the rational number \(\frac{8}{7}\), we can check if there is a base \(\beta\) such that it can have exact representation. A finite floating-point system with base \(\beta\) and precision \(t\) can represent only numbers of the form \(\pm m \cdot \beta^e\) where \(1 \leq m < \beta^t\) and the exponent \(e\) is within the admissible range. To check if the number \(\frac{8}{7}\) has an exact representation in a finite floating-point system, we can rewrite it as a fraction of integers and try to express it in the form \(\pm m \cdot \beta^e\). We have: \(\frac{8}{7} = 1 + \frac{1}{7}\) We need to find an integer base \(\beta\) and a precision \(t\) such that \(\frac{1}{7}\) can be written as \(\frac{m}{\beta^t}\) for some integer \(m\). Let's rewrite it as: \(\frac{1}{7} = \frac{m}{\beta^t} \Rightarrow m = \frac{\beta^t}{7}\) The equivalent condition for \(m\) to be an integer is that \(\beta^t\) must be divisible by 7. For example, when \(\beta = 7\), for any \(t \geq 1\), we have \(\beta^t = 7^t\) which is divisible by 7. Therefore, the number \(\frac{8}{7}\) can be exactly represented in a finite floating-point system with base \(\beta = 7\) and any precision \(t \geq 1\).

Determine if a finite floating-point system exists for the irrational number \(\pi\)

For the irrational number \(\pi\), we know that this number cannot be represented as a ratio of two integers. Therefore, it is not possible to rewrite it as a fraction of integers. An irrational number has an infinite non-repeating decimal representation, which means that it cannot be represented exactly in any finite floating-point system. The reason is that a finite floating-point system has a limited number of digits for both the significand and the exponent. Since irrational numbers have infinite non-repeating decimal representations, they cannot be represented exactly using a finite floating-point system. In conclusion, for the irrational number \(\pi\), there is no finite floating-point system that can represent it exactly.

Key concepts

Numerical Methods

When engaging with numerical methods, we typically work within the realm of computation where precision is a significant constraint. Numerical methods are algorithms used for the computation of numeric data. One aspect of these methods involves representing numbers in a manner that can be processed by computers. Since computers have limited memory, we need systems capable of representing numbers with finite precision.

For instance, to check if a number has an exact representation in a finite floating-point system, we compare its expression to the form \(\pm m \cdot \beta^e\). If we can align our number to this format, we can claim it has a finite representation given a suitable base \(\beta\) and precision \(t\). This is crucial in numerical computations where the accuracy of representation directly affects the outcome of algorithms. It's like finding the right box to fit a peculiarly shaped item; if the dimensions align, the item fits perfectly. Hence, understanding the principles behind finite floating-point systems can sharpen the accuracy and reliability of computational results.

Rational Number Representation

Rational numbers can be thought of as the neat and tidy inhabitants of the numerical world. They can be precisely represented as the quotient of two integers, like the clean fraction \(\frac{8}{7}\). When we seek a finite floating-point system for a rational number, we're looking for a structure wherein it can be comfortably housed without approximation.

To guarantee an exact fit, the base \(\beta\) raised to the precision \(t\) should be capable of dividing the denominator of the fraction without leaving a remainder. This is akin to saying that if you divide a pie into seven equal slices, a system with a base of seven will allow you to measure out exactly one slice—there's no guessing or cutting slivers off another slice. If done correctly, the representation in the finite system is neat, with no rounding or trailing decimals required. When crafting learning materials or providing explanations, simplifying concepts such as these using everyday metaphors can greatly enhance student comprehension.

Irrational Number Representation

Dallying with irrational numbers is akin to venturing into a forest that has no end—it goes on forever without repeating patterns. Numbers like \(\pi\) are notorious for their non-terminating, non-repeating decimal expansions. This property of irrational numbers means they can't be perfectly accommodated in a finite floating-point system; it's like trying to store the entire sea in a bathtub, an impossible feat.

In our finite floating-point construct, we're bound by limits on both the significand and the exponent. The digits these numbers flaunt after the decimal point are endless, and as such, an exact representation slips through the cracks of finite precision. Therefore, when we teach about irrational numbers, we must underscore the reality that we can only approach their true value as closely as our system's precision allows, never achieving it entirely. This understanding is vital for students grappling with the implications of irrational numbers in practical computational problems.