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: Find the perfect square closest to n(x), i just want the perfect square above or below no decimals. Can it be solved using geometry?
Replies: 7   Last Post: Nov 1, 2013 8:53 PM

Advanced Search

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

Posts: 4,321
Registered: 5/20/10
Re: Find the perfect square closest to n(x), i just want the perfect
square above or below no decimals. Can it be solved using geometry?

Posted: Nov 1, 2013 12:22 AM
  Click to see the message monospaced in plain text Plain Text   Click to reply to this topic Reply

On Thursday, October 31, 2013 8:01:53 PM UTC-7, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> jonas.thornvall@gmail.com writes:
>
> <snip>
>

> > Actually Ben i have a similar that may be easier for you to follow,
>
> > any square can be divided into 4 sub squares. And if we have a number
>
> > we can find the 10^x above it and 10^x-1 below it.
>
> >
>
> > So 10^x is 1 now we can chose if we want 0 at real zero or zero at
>
> > square 10^x-1 If we choose the later we close in faster. Now the area
>
> > between the lesser and bigger square or if we use zero, can be
>
> > described as a percentage ratio of the height.
>
>
>
> Sorry, I can't make head nor tail of this.
>
>
>
> <snip>
>

> > The perfect square we find is subtracted from our number and now we
>
> > work same approach for this smaller square. This is repeated until the
>
> > full number is encoded to a series of squares + a small integer less
>
> > then 4.
>
>
>
> Yes, this bit I've understood, but why? What's the point of doing this?
>
>




I'd like a SQRT(X) algorithm that goes to 10,000 digits.

useful for 1 time cypher pads in this age of eavesdropping!



In Javascript, so no more than 100,000 maths operations..


Binary is fine too!


I understand Ben's point... if you are using repeated approximations
then Newtons method is very fast.



Herc
--
www.PrologDatabase.com



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.