On 12 Maj, 10:28, JT <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 10 Maj, 20:04, "Julio Di Egidio" <ju...@diegidio.name> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > "JT" <jonas.thornv...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > >news:email@example.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=(100000000000000000000000000000 000000000000/2-1)/ > > > 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 > > You are a fucking clueless monkey Julio, don't you think that > mathematica can handle a simple division, together with Wofram, > mathematica is one of the most__accurate__ math packages out there on > the market. And they should not be able to handle simple floating > point arithmetic that take 3 days to program. Even for me that do not > even claim to be a competent programmer in any language i would do it > in notime. So that is not why....... instead it is their arithmetic > simply fucked up it, so no it isn't sound. They should build it upon > geometrical principles known since Zohan of Babylon. The ones behind > that programming is fucked up prostitutes to mainstream nillywilly > anal imaginary half cats. This is what i think about them. > > http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2321146/What-earth-Half-cat-c...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1SkUxknvRlc > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndN_5IrPOhc > Back in the day of Babylon the priest was astronoms, so the whole > geometric priniciples was founded by priests. And the most famous of > them all was Zohan, also known as Zoroaster. The village of Zohan can > still be found in Iran. We often focus upon other traits of > Zoroaster, > that have become larger then life after his death myths, but during > the time of Babylon he was the greatest astronom, mathematician the > world had seen.