# Excel + Calculations

by StevieTNZ
Tags: calculations, excel
 P: 763 Hi there, If I perform the following calculation in Excel: =100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00 0,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+50 I get: 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 Shouldn't the answer be: 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,050?
 PF Gold P: 5,472 No, the answer will be constrained by the number of bits used by the computer to represent the numbers, and you've got WAY more than it can handle, so the 50 gets dropped as a rounding error.
 Mentor P: 11,056 According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numeric...icrosoft_Excel numbers in Excel are limited to 15 significant figures. So 100,000,000,000,000+50 works, but 100,000,000,000,000,000+50 doesn't.
P: 763

## Excel + Calculations

Is there any other program out there that will present the result given in my original post?
 P: 962 Lots of other programs can do that. Computer Algebra Systems, like Mathematica, Sage, Maxima, Reduce, Maple... all do that. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_algebra_system Some calculator programs, like bc and many others do that. https://www.google.com/search?q=big+...ger+calculator Many programming languages, like Icon, Java... do that, don't be fooled by those who think 64 bits is big. https://www.google.com/search?q=prog...ge+big+integer
 Sci Advisor PF Gold P: 9,093 64 bits is chump change for deep calculations. You need a monster computer to process calculations beyond a few hundred decimal points. That is why numerical analysis takes so long and is so incredibly expensive.
 P: 315 Just for grins, try putting the smaller number first.
PF Gold
P: 5,472
 Quote by harborsparrow Just for grins, try putting the smaller number first.
Do you really think that's going to have any effect on the fact that the larger number is WAY bigger than Excel can handle as an integer?
P: 315
 Quote by phinds Do you really think that's going to have any effect on the fact that the larger number is WAY bigger than Excel can handle as an integer?
Sometimes it does help to prevent loss of precision by putting the smaller number first, when there is a huge range of magnitude difference between two operands.
PF Gold
P: 5,472
 Quote by harborsparrow Sometimes it does help to prevent loss of precision by putting the smaller number first, when there is a huge range of magnitude difference between two operands.
Yes, and that does not answer my question at all. I am asking about a specific case.

 Related Discussions Introductory Physics Homework 4 Math & Science Software 2 Electrical Engineering 0 Electrical Engineering 0 Computing & Technology 3