Calculating the root of a number by hand

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter NODARman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    hand Root
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around methods for calculating the root of a number by hand, specifically focusing on techniques for square roots and the historical context of these methods. Participants explore various algorithms, including the Babylonian method and the Newton-Raphson method, while questioning the accuracy and applicability of these techniques without the use of calculators.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the possibility of calculating roots by hand, specifically mentioning square roots and providing examples like ##\sqrt{1.2}##.
  • One participant introduces the Babylonian method for roots, suggesting it may not be as accurate as other methods, and provides the formula for it.
  • Another participant argues that the formula presented is derived from the Newton-Raphson method rather than the Babylonian method, emphasizing that derivatives are not necessary for its derivation.
  • There is a mention of a long division-like technique for calculating square roots that was taught in the past but is no longer common.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the terminology used, specifically regarding the notation of the primed variable ##x'##, clarifying that it refers to a new result rather than a derivative.
  • Historical references are made to ancient Mesopotamian methods for calculating square roots, suggesting that these calculations were performed by hand and were documented on clay tablets.
  • Participants discuss the broader category of algorithms in mathematics, indicating that there are many methods available for root calculations beyond those mentioned in the thread.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the origins of the Babylonian method or the accuracy of the various methods discussed. There are competing views regarding the derivation of the formulas and the best techniques for calculating roots by hand.

Contextual Notes

Some limitations in the discussion include a lack of clarity on which specific roots are being referenced (e.g., square roots vs. cube roots) and the dependence on historical interpretations of mathematical methods. The discussion also reflects varying levels of familiarity with the terminology and techniques involved.

NODARman
Messages
57
Reaction score
13
TL;DR
.
Hi, is it possible, is there any formula that can help me to take root from (for example) 1,2 without a calculator (by hand)?
For example, there is a cos(x) formula that can be calculated on the paper:
$$\cos x=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n} \frac{x^{2 n}}{(2 n) !}$$

There is the Babylonian method for roots, but it's not as accurate as the cos(x) formula.
$$
x^{\prime}=\frac{1}{2}\left(x+\frac{n}{x}\right)
$$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
NODARman said:
Hi, is it possible, is there any formula that can help me to take root from (for example) 1,2 without a calculator (by hand)?
It's not clear to me what you are asking here.
Which root -- square root, cube root, etc.?
In your example are you asking about the square root of 1.2; i.e. ##\sqrt{1.2}##?
NODARman said:
For example, there is a cos(x) formula that can be calculated on the paper:
$$\cos x=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-1)^{n} \frac{x^{2 n}}{(2 n) !}$$
This formula has nothing to do with roots. It is the Maclaurin series representation for the cosine function. There's a corresponding series for the sine function and many other functions.

NODARman said:
There is the Babylonian method for roots, but it's not as accurate as the cos(x) formula.
$$
x^{\prime}=\frac{1}{2}\left(x+\frac{n}{x}\right)
$$
I don't believe this derives from the Babylonians, since they knew nothing about derivatives. This formula derives from a technique called the Newton (or Newton-Raphson) method.

If you're interested in calculating square roots by hand, I was taught a technique back when I was in the 8th grade, a long time ago. The technique is somewhat akin to long division. As far as I know, it's no longer taught. Here's a link to a youtube video:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker, PeroK, DrClaude and 3 others
Mark44 said:
I don't believe this derives from the Babylonians, since they knew nothing about derivatives.
You don't need to know anything about derivatives to derive this method, you simply need to realise that if ## x ## is an understimate of ## \sqrt n ## then ## \frac n x ## is an overestimate (and vice versa) and therefore the midpoint ## x^{\prime}=\frac{1}{2}\left(x+\frac{n}{x}\right) ## is a better estimate.

The term "Babylonian method" is commonly used, although I am not aware of a confirmed source. See e.g. https://demonstrations.wolfram.com/BabylonianAlgorithmForComputingSquareRoots/.

Edit: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0315086098922091 seems to provide a source.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrClaude, PeroK and NODARman
Mark44 said:
It's not clear to me what you are asking here.
Which root -- square root, cube root, etc.?
In your example are you asking about the square root of 1.2; i.e. ##\sqrt{1.2}##?

This formula has nothing to do with roots. It is the Maclaurin series representation for the cosine function. There's a corresponding series for the sine function and many other functions.I don't believe this derives from the Babylonians, since they knew nothing about derivatives. This formula derives from a technique called the Newton (or Newton-Raphson) method.

If you're interested in calculating square roots by hand, I was taught a technique back when I was in the 8th grade, a long time ago. The technique is somewhat akin to long division. As far as I know, it's no longer taught. Here's a link to a youtube video:

x' is not a derivative of x, it means the new result of x.
 
NODARman said:
x' is not a derivative of x, it means the new result of x.
Without any explanatory context, a "primed" variable would ordinarily be interpreted to mean the derivative of that variable.
 
These algorithms fall into something we call algorithms in mathematics. A numerical analysis book, has many of these types of solutions, not just for roots.

To give you a better answer. What are you trying to find the root of? a square root, cubic, function? A particular example would help.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K