**Next message:**Otto Stolz: "Re: Vulgar fractions"**Previous message:**Christopher John Fynn: "Re: Vulgar fractions"**Maybe in reply to:**Otto Stolz: "Vulgar fractions (was: 8859-1, 8859-15, 1252 and Euro)"**Next in thread:**Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com: "RE: Vulgar fractions (was: 8859-1, 8859-15, 1252 and Euro)"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

One should not overlook that vulgar fractions often express

quantities with absolute accuracy. For example, "7 1/3" is

accurate, but that same accuracy cannot cannot be attained

in a decimal expression "7.333..." with a finite number of digits.

Also, giving you a dessert portion of 1/6 of the pie expresses

the process of cutting the pie into 6 pieces as well the portion.

To a mathematician, there is nothing "vulgar" about "vulgar fractions!"

Clive

*> >Am 2000-02-10 um 15:07 h (PST) hat Paul Keinanen geschrieben:
*

*> >> These fractions might be usable in countries using "Imperial" units,
*

*> >> but as far as I know, there are only a few countries still using
*

*> >> "Imperial" units :-).
*

*>
*

*> Why are fractions only usable with Imperial units? Do ISO standards
*

*> forbid metric units to be written as fractions? Also, not everything
*

*> is a unit; fractions are very useful in mathematical formulae, and
*

*> for numbers in general.
*

*>
*

*> Peter.
*

**Next message:**Otto Stolz: "Re: Vulgar fractions"**Previous message:**Christopher John Fynn: "Re: Vulgar fractions"**Maybe in reply to:**Otto Stolz: "Vulgar fractions (was: 8859-1, 8859-15, 1252 and Euro)"**Next in thread:**Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com: "RE: Vulgar fractions (was: 8859-1, 8859-15, 1252 and Euro)"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2
: Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:58 EDT
*