"game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - Printable Version +- Tetration Forum ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum)+-- Forum: Tetration and Related Topics ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)+--- Forum: Mathematical and General Discussion ( https://math.eretrandre.org/tetrationforum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)+--- Thread: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? ( /showthread.php?tid=272) |

"game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/17/2009
Hi! I already investigated to know the parts of cases decimais of number. to remember - 1.000000000000000000001^0.5 =~ 1.000000000000000000000499999999999999999999875\ 00000000000000000006249999999999999999996093750\ 00000000000000273437499999999999999794921875000\ 000000000161132812499999999999869079589843750000000109100342 1.00000000000000000001 ^^ 0.5 = ?? (in 100 cases decimal) 1.000000000000000000001 ^^ 0.5 = ?? (in 100 cases decimal) you do calcuate. good luck! but I already got results with almost exact. !!warning: x ^^ 0.5 =/= ssqrt(x). RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:1.00000000000000000001 ^^ 0.5 = ?? (in 100 cases decimal) But this depends strongly on the method you use, doesnt it? RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/18/2009
bo198214 Wrote:But this depends strongly on the method you use, doesnt it? you do calculate by new "regular slog". sorry but you are a bit failure because I help this solution and it's "game". lol RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:you do calculate by new "regular slog". There are several methods: 1. Regular iteration (which is actually the oldest, was already considered in 1870 by Schröder) 2. via natural slog. 3. matrix power method. RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/18/2009
bo198214 Wrote:There are several methods: 1. you do not because it's old method is NOT equal to new method. 2. no! the base is any number. 3. no! ops! not "regular slog" but yes new "Regular iteration". sorry! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tetration/Summary#Evaluation_methods RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
Sorry, I dont know what you mean. I never read about a "new" and an "old" regular iteration method. I also dont know what do you want to say with "no". Do you want to say that this is not the method which should be used. Or do you want to say that this method doesnt work. Or that it shouldnt be used generally? *head scratch* RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/18/2009
There are several methods: 1. Regular iteration (which is actually the oldest, was already considered in 1870 by Schröder) the "old" Regular iteration is by Schröder until now!?? no, now "new" Regular iteration is by Ansus. you know Ansus (he is the user of this site) 2. via natural slog. no! the base is any number. 3. matrix power method. no! you do calculate by "Regular iteration by Ansus". RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:1. Regular iteration (which is actually the oldest, was already considered in 1870 by Schröder)Its not by Ansus, its by Schröder and Levy. Thatswhy there is the name Schröder function for if the fixed point is . I described the method here, its the same as what Ansus wrote down, except that the focus is on slog and not on sexp. Quote:2. via natural slog. Natural slog is a method that works for arbitrary bases . It was first described by Walker and rediscovered by Andrew Robbins (andydude on this forum). You can find a description somewhere on the forum. Though I am inclined to rename the method to "intuitive slog/iteration", because in a context like "natural iteration" it can be easily mistaken to mean "iteration by a natural number". Quote:3. matrix power method.What means "no"? Does it mean "matrix power method is bad"? Haha, then Gottfried would get quite angry with you! PS: You can quote someone by sourounding the quoted text by Code: `[quote]` Code: `[/quote]` RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/18/2009
bo198214 Wrote:Its not by Ansus, its by Schröder and Levy. Thatswhy there is the name Schröder function forok. bo198214 Wrote:Natural slog is a method that works for arbitrary bases . It was first described by Walker and rediscovered by Andrew Robbins (andydude on this forum). You can find a description somewhere on the forum. Though I am inclined to rename the method to "intuitive slog/iteration", because in a context like "natural iteration" it can be easily mistaken to mean "iteration by a natural number".I know it. natural superlog is slog_e (x) or sln (x). lol bo198214 Wrote:What means "no"? Does it mean "matrix power method is bad"? Haha, then Gottfried would get quite angry with you!ok. but if you do caculate by Andrew' slog then you don't get or you get result with problem. bo198214 Wrote:PS: You can quote someone by sourounding the quoted text byI already know it!! lol if you have some difficulty for caculate then I will do 1 solution of result here. RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:No, thatswhy I wrote "is a method that works for arbitrary bases "!!!bo198214 Wrote:Natural slog is a method that works for arbitrary bases . It was first described by Walker and rediscovered by Andrew Robbins (andydude on this forum). You can find a description somewhere on the forum. Though I am inclined to rename the method to "intuitive slog/iteration", because in a context like "natural iteration" it can be easily mistaken to mean "iteration by a natural number".I know it. natural superlog is slog_e (x) or sln (x). lol Quote:ok. but if you do caculate by Andrew' slog then you don't get or you get I would get a result. But actually its not clear why these values are interesting. Quote:I already know it!! lolSo why dont you use it then!? |