Calculation beyond computional limits

  • Thread starter Thread starter short circut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation Limits
short circut
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
So i am ttying to calculate a velocity in this problem i dreamt up. Only problem i can't get a computer to solve it. So i was hoping someone here could help

i am trying to find the value of x such that

\frac{\sqrt{1-x^2}}{x}=1.0967*10^{-86}

This arose in me trying to calculate somewhat relativistically how fast a raindrop would have to travel to for into a black hole. My result is very crude.

edit:

I think i have it now. And i can't find delete
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Let a = 1.0967*10^{-86}

Square the equation to get it to get
\frac{1-x^2}{x^2} =a^2
Now solve for x^2 and take the positive square root (x must be positive since a is positive).

x is going to be VERY close to 1 (in fact I expect most software will report x=1 if you ask for a numerical answer).
 
rasmhop said:
Let a = 1.0967*10^{-86}

Square the equation to get it to get
\frac{1-x^2}{x^2} =a^2
Now solve for x^2 and take the positive square root (x must be positive since a is positive).

x is going to be VERY close to 1 (in fact I expect most software will report x=1 if you ask for a numerical answer).

Yeah everything is reporting 1. Thats what i was trying to get around. I don't think i can get around it. Because that gives me a ratio of sqrt(1/(1.(86 zeros)1)) Which i can't even imagine. So basically you have to get that v/c ratio of the speed of light to turn a raindrop into a black hole semirelativistically. I am not well versed in relativistic fluid dynamics so i imagine this is quite a ways off. Plus not to mention i only have 3 sig figs. So i could never actually measure this anyways.
 
Don't you have a computing center in your school? Oh, maybe you are in HS, sorry then. Most colleges have computers that with something like Mathematica, can give quadruple and more precision. At 16 digits per precision, I guess you would need sextuple precision or so, it certainly can be done with the right software.
 
Well if you really want a numeric approximation I just asked Maple to compute 250 digits of this. I'm not sure exactly how Maple does its floating-point computation, but I suspect the long string of 0's at the end is a sign that it doesn't handle such high-precision numbers by default (but up to something like 150 digits it seems correct).

0.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999398624555000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

I have no idea how this could be of any use however.
 
No need need for any computational power here. You can solve it using a binomial expansion to a VERY close approximation as :

x \simeq 1 - \frac{a^2}{2}

where a= 1.0967 \times 10^{-86}
 
Last edited:
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Back
Top