"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) |

RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/18/2009
bo198214 Wrote:No, thatswhy I wrote "is a method that works for arbitrary bases "!!!ok but I don't mistake. Quote:I would get a result. But actually its not clear why these values are interesting. Quote:So why dont you use it then!?I don't want quote. you: 1. ---------- 2. ---------- ... I: 1. --------- ... because it's smaller and easier than quotes. do you understand well? RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/18/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:you: No *lol* RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - andydude - 04/20/2009
I'll have a go at it. 1.00000000000000000001^^(1/2) = 1.000000000000000000009999999999000000000099999999987500000001499999999836458333351666666664502604166916666666638173719621422222221817020670621277777771935930347661211970809173335777978054727401267322532195532504077689101941770151 RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/20/2009
andydude Wrote:I'll have a go at it. it's correct!! you get w/ 225 cases decimal. but you calculated still too time to result? how many digits and many exponents w/ iterations (= n_1^n_2^...^n_k^x) for to evaluate better? do you use maple? I am 7000 digits and 199 exponents for evaluate, using maple, in only 100 cases decimal. RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - bo198214 - 04/20/2009
andydude Wrote:I'll have a go at it. Wah, Andy my saviour! *ggg* RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - andydude - 04/21/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:it's correct!! you get w/ 225 cases decimal. but you calculated still too time to result? It didn't take that much time at all. The base is very close to 1, which means regular iteration works much better (The natural superlogarithm is very erratic for bases between 1 and eta). Also, I used Mathematica. So I used a 10-term and 15-term regular iteration series (polynomial), compared them, and each took about 3 seconds to evaluate. When they were identical, I assumed all the digits were "significant". Andrew Robbins RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/21/2009
andydude Wrote:It didn't take that much time at all. The base is very close to 1, which means regular iteration works much better (The natural superlogarithm is very erratic for bases between 1 and eta). Also, I used Mathematica. So I used a 10-term and 15-term regular iteration series (polynomial), compared them, and each took about 3 seconds to evaluate. When they were identical, I assumed all the digits were "significant". slog_b (x) = y I didn't convert from natural slog to tetration using maple but I tried many times to add new each one of cases decimal of x since x=1 when the result is very close to y=0.5. these tentations last 30-60 minutes. do you convert from natural slog to tetration? RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - andydude - 04/22/2009
nuninho1980 Wrote:do you convert from natural slog to tetration? No, I used regular iteration from the fixed-point p = 1.000000000000000000010000000000000000000100000000000000000001500000000000000000023333333333333333333733333333333333333340408333333333333333463361111111111111113553591269841269841316667063492063492064403294973544973544991509125661375661376019282963213484046824576164483124899791712269571579076787413095423662162995000357635728649265105119539204243709252241024379290515068892945934184599484695347437210742175409191006184949392420206632843923492376014272124055526327911424878272 in the series where a = 1.00000000000000000001 Andrew Robbins RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - nuninho1980 - 04/22/2009
andydude Wrote:I used regular iteration from the fixed-point p = this method is much faster. thanks! p+ ... (1-p)^2+ ... what do you add new last terms, if you want 15 or more terms? RE: "game" - to calculate 1.00...001 ^^ 0.5 = ? - andydude - 04/23/2009
I know you use maple, so I've tried to make this Maple-ish, but I do not have Maple, so I'm programming blind. Let me know if this works: Code: `carleman_matrix := proc(expr, x, p, n) ` Andrew Robbins |