Drexel dragonThe Math ForumDonate to the Math Forum



Search All of the Math Forum:

Views expressed in these public forums are not endorsed by Drexel University or The Math Forum.


Math Forum » Discussions » sci.math.* » sci.math

Topic: Is it me or is it Wolfram?
Replies: 16   Last Post: May 13, 2013 4:51 PM

Advanced Search

Back to Topic List Back to Topic List Jump to Tree View Jump to Tree View   Messages: [ Previous | Next ]
JT

Posts: 1,150
Registered: 4/7/12
Re: Is it me or is it Wolfram?
Posted: May 10, 2013 3:24 PM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On 10 Maj, 20:04, "Julio Di Egidio" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote:
> "JT" <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:82f721d1-c691-47fa-8428-913e49966f62@m7g2000vbf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> >http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=0.499999999999999999999999999999...
>
> > n = -1.
> > 0.49999999999999999999999999999999999999999 = (n/2-1)/n

>
> >http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%3D%2810000000000000000000000000...
>
> > 0.49999999999999999999999999999999999999999=(100000000000000000000000000000000000000000/2-1)/
> > 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000

>
> > I do not understand to, can please someone explain why and how wolfram
> > get -1 for the upper calculation, it is obvious using the one below
> > what the solution is?

>
> > And if there was two solutions should not Wolfram give them both? What
> > is going on here, i am total newb to math calculators so tell me what
> > is going on?

>
> Take the equation k = (n/2-1)/n, and consider that your k is not fitting
> into a float (most probably they are using doubles, i.e. the 64-bit floats,
> but I haven't checked), so k is (apparently) rounded to 0.5.  Then,
> depending on how you transform the equation and the exact step at which you
> substitute your value for k, you either get -Infinity or -1 (exercise left
> to the reader, or I guess you could just check the step-by-step solution,
> but I haven't).
>
> That is how floating point works: you'd rather ideally use
> arbitrary-precision rationals, otherwise, as mentioned already in the
> thread, increase the precision of your floating point numbers.  But I do not
> think you can do any of these with Wolfram Alpha.
>
> Julio


No that was not the answer given in any of the primitive math
calculations i did around 97-98, but this is the answer from
mathematica and wolfram.
And just one more thing, for all the prostitutes in mathematics go
fuck yourself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SkUxknvRlc
Fuck your kebab
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndN_5IrPOhc




Point your RSS reader here for a feed of the latest messages in this topic.

[Privacy Policy] [Terms of Use]

© Drexel University 1994-2014. All Rights Reserved.
The Math Forum is a research and educational enterprise of the Drexel University School of Education.