But floating-point notation also can’t precisely represent irrational numbers…
Kinda. Technicaly no since an irrational number is a number that cannot be defined as a ratio of 2 existing rational numbers. Any number that can be represented in any rational base can by definition be represented as a ratio of somthing/base^n. This ignore the case of an irrational base but its practically useless cos any rational and most other irrational numbers will be irrational.
What u think ur trying to say is that some numbers cannot be represented in one base but can in another for example 1/3 can be represented as a decimal in base 3 but cannot jn base 10 ie u get 0.333(3 repeating forever).
Tieing back to floating point which uses base 2 u end up with simmillar issues with base10 base2 conversions hence most of the errors with floating point errors (yes at very large and very small numbers u lose accuracy but in practice most errors arise from base convention).
Following Pythagoreanism and believing irrational numbers to be blasphemous. They’re represented by being struck down by the gods.
