Re: precision on all calcs
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: precision on all calcs
I am replying to my own message to answer a concern that has been
voiced on the list by several people, however those articles haven't
appeared on the newsgroup yet. I in fact do not believe 180*sin(1)
will EVER equal pi. I was discussing the fact how I was working on my
calc with sin waves which represented sound waves. However, when I
tried to plot them interfering (the beats) the answer was right for
one set of functions I tried, and dead wrong for the other. I would
assume this is due to precision?
Neil Padgett
padgett@mcmaster.ca (Neil Padgett) muttered:
->Richard Bowman <richard@BOWMANSOFT.COM> muttered:
->
->->Not perfect obviously (there isn't a perfect pi), but precise to
the
->->decimals the calculator displays. (That is only 11 digits, which
->->shouldn't
->->be too dificult)
->
->I'd have to agree with Richard. (See my response to Bernard below)
->
->Bernard Domroy said:
->->>If you folks would pay attention in your math classes instead of
->->>playing
->->>these silly games, you would know the answer. Pi is an
irrational
->->number.
->->>Yet you would like a computer algorithm that returns an exact
value
->->for
->->the
->->>sin (1). That's rich!!!
->[CLIP]
->
->Perhaps, if you payed attention in YOUR math classes instead of
->mocking people exploring a problem you might know that it is
possible
->to develop a rational approximation for PI to a given number of
->decimal places. So, a computer algorithm accurate to the number of
->decimal places in the calculator is not only possible, it should be
->expected.
->
->Neil Padgett <padgett@mcmaster.ca>
References: