I lost my calculator batteries in a flood .

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around evaluating the expression \(\left(\frac{256^{16}-1}{256^{16}}\right)^{256^{16}}\). Participants explore various interpretations and calculations related to this expression, considering its mathematical properties and potential answers.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant argues that the expression cannot equal one or zero, suggesting that it must be 0.3679 based on the process of elimination.
  • Another participant calculates that the limit approaches 1/e as x approaches infinity, indicating that 1/e is approximately 0.3679.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about their calculator's output, initially miscalculating and later confirming that 0.3679 is indeed the correct answer.
  • One participant proposes that the expression could equal 0.000, arguing that as the base approaches a decimal, the exponential growth would lead it towards zero.
  • Another participant mentions that the answer could be very close to 1, suggesting that it rounds to 1.000 due to the presence of many nines in the decimal expansion.
  • A later reply corrects their previous assertion, stating that the actual value is closer to 0.000000000000000000000001, which rounds to 0.00.
  • Warren emphasizes that the expression is neither 1 nor 0, referencing earlier posts to support this claim.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the value of the expression, with no consensus reached on a definitive answer. Various interpretations and calculations lead to different conclusions.

Contextual Notes

Some calculations depend on the interpretation of limits and the behavior of the expression as x approaches infinity. There are unresolved assumptions about the accuracy of numerical approximations and rounding.

BobG
Science Advisor
Messages
364
Reaction score
87
I lost my calculator batteries in a flood...

What's this equal?

[tex]\left(\frac{256^{16}-1}{256^{16}}\right)^{256^{16}}[/tex]

a) 2.178
b) 1.000
c) .3679
d) 0.000
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Well, it's obviously not one, because the number inside the parentheses is not one.

It's also obviously not zero for the same reason.

It's not 2.178, because the number inside the parentheses is less than one, and multiplying a fraction smaller than one by another fraction smaller than one must result in a fraction smaller than one.

By the process of elimination, it must be 0.3679.

- Warren
 
i get 1/e...i could be missing something in my work...or maybe even forgetting my calculus lol...

y = [(x-1)/x]^x
lny = x[ln(x-1) - lnx]
lny = ln(x-1 / x) / 1/x
using lhopitals...

lny = (x/(x-1))(1/x^2) / -1/x^2
lny = -x/ x-1 as x approaches infinity...lny = -1 so y = 1/e

But i may be wrong since i am assuming x goes to infinity while its 256^16.

Manu
 
As the number x in

[tex]\left(\frac{x-1}{x}\right)^{x}[/tex]

approaches infinity, the result definitely does approach 1/e. Since 256^16 has plenty of significant digits, 1/e is close enough to an accuracy of only four decimals. :smile:

- Warren
 
And that's what 0.3679 is !
 
Hi Warren,

im such a dummy, lol, for 1/e in my windows calc. i kept using 2.178 which is answer a) for the constant e. Finally i looked e in my pocket handbook and found the right one, so it is answer c. And btw how did you use equation in the posts? Please do let me know tnx Warren.

Manu
 
Manu2380 said:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997 And btw how did you use equation in the posts? Please do let me know tnx Warren.
The short answer is simply to click on the images to see their source code. You can just copy and paste the source into your own messages to include those equations. You'll figure out how it works in no time by example.

The long answer is to read this thread:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=8997

- Warren
 
Manu, we have Chroot to thank for LaTex on PF.
 
No one silly enough to unthinkingly punch this in on their calculator, huh? :-p
 
  • #10
JFruit said:
:redface: No, i did, i readd tah title adn did the same but i got 0 in the end hmm!
:wink:

Strange :bugeye: I would have thought you'd get 1
 
  • #11
Would it not be d) 0.000 because in the parantheses would be a decimal and therefore as it grew exponentially it would lessen infinitely towards 0, and 0.000 just means that whatever number rounded to three decimal places would be 0? Or did y'all already establish that?
 
  • #12
BobG said:
No one silly enough to unthinkingly punch this in on their calculator, huh? :-p
>_< ..., whistles and looks over shoulder..
 
  • #13
The answer is something like .9999999999999999999999999999999 but has many more nines than i can fit. So this rounds to 1.000, since the answers go to 3 decimals.

That is the answer.
 
  • #14
My mistake, the real answer is more like 0.000000000000000000000001 to many more decimal places, so it rounds to 0.00.

That is the final answer.
 
  • #15
Tau:

It is neither 1 nor 0. Please read the earlier posts in the thread.

- Warren
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K