Keltham will come over and check how she arrived at that conclusion, but will soon approvingly inform Paxti that if, as is not actually the case, 2^19 exactly equalled 3^12, then yes, there'd be exactly -1/6 2s in 8/9.  Please observe that 1/6 is 0.1666... or about 0.17.

Keltham will come over and check how she arrived at that conclusion, but will soon approvingly inform Paxti that if, as is not actually the case, 2^19 exactly equalled 3^12, then yes, there'd be exactly -1/6 2s in 8/9.  Please observe that -1/6 is -0.1666... or about -0.17.

Keltham will come over and check how she arrived at that conclusion, but will soon approvingly inform Paxti that if, as is not actually the case, 2^19 exactly equalled 3^12, then yes, there'd be exactly -1/6 2s in 8/9.  Please observe that -1/6 is -0.1666... or about -0.17.

To try to see it a glance, consider that if there's 19/12 of a 2, in one 3, that's 1/12 more of a 2 than 1-and-a-half 2s:  19/12 = 18/12 + 1/12.

So in a 9, there should be 2/12 more 2s than in 8.  Though it's actually a bit more, because 3^12 is greater than 2^19, so there's a bit more than 19/12 2s in a 3.