Calculation beyond computional limits

  • Thread starter Thread starter short circut
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation Limits
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the velocity of a raindrop approaching a black hole, specifically solving the equation \(\frac{\sqrt{1-x^2}}{x}=1.0967*10^{-86}\). The user initially struggled with computational limits, as many software programs returned a value of x very close to 1. It was suggested that squaring the equation and using a binomial expansion could yield a more precise approximation for x. The approximation derived was \(x \simeq 1 - \frac{a^2}{2}\), where \(a=1.0967 \times 10^{-86}\). Ultimately, the challenge lies in the limitations of numerical precision when dealing with such small values.
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:
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Just chatting with my son about Maths and he casually mentioned that 0 would be the midpoint of the number line from -inf to +inf. I wondered whether it wouldn’t be more accurate to say there is no single midpoint. Couldn’t you make an argument that any real number is exactly halfway between -inf and +inf?

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