Obtaining a more accurate calculator?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Michio Cuckoo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculator
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating relativistic photon energy shifts, specifically focusing on the challenges of using calculators for very small exponent values in the expression e^{\frac{x}{c^{2}}}. Participants explore methods to improve accuracy and discuss the implications of approximations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses difficulty in calculating relativistic photon energy shifts due to the small exponent in e^{\frac{x}{c^{2}}} leading to nonsensical values on a TI-84 calculator.
  • Another participant questions the accuracy of approximating e^{\frac{x}{c^{2}}} as 1+\frac{x}{c^{2}} when \frac{x}{c^{2}} is very small.
  • A suggestion is made to use Maclaurin's expansion for better accuracy.
  • One participant provides a method to estimate the error using the Lagrange form of the remainder in Taylor polynomials, suggesting that cutting the first two terms could yield sufficient accuracy.
  • Another participant clarifies that taking the first three terms might be acceptable, but questions the necessary accuracy and the size of x/c².
  • Participants mention online calculators that can handle large numbers, providing a specific link to one such calculator.
  • There is a discussion about the units of x/c², with one participant questioning the representation of x.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the adequacy of approximations and the necessary accuracy for their calculations. There is no consensus on the best approach or the implications of the approximations discussed.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions about the values of x and the required accuracy are not fully defined, leading to uncertainty in the discussion. The dependence on the choice of approximation method and the limitations of specific calculators are also noted.

Michio Cuckoo
Messages
84
Reaction score
0
I'm trying to calculate relativistic photon energy shifts, and I have to use e^{\frac{x}{c^{2}}}
However,since I'm dealing with the speed of light, the exponent becomes extremely small and my TI-84 gives me a nonsensical value.

Could anyone recommend a more accurate calculator?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Michio Cuckoo said:
I'm trying to calculate relativistic photon energy shifts, and I have to use e^{\frac{x}{c^{2}}}
However,since I'm dealing with the speed of light, the exponent becomes extremely small

If \frac{x}{c^{2}} is that small, how inaccurate would it be to approximate the answer as 1+\frac{x}{c^{2}}?
 
so you think i should use maclaurin's expansion?
 
Yes, just cut the first two terms. By the Lagrange form of the remainder, we obtain that an upper bound for the error can be given by \displaystyle \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!c^{2k+2}} in a Taylor polynomial of degree k. Taking k as two (the above case), we obtain that an upper bound of the error is \displaystyle \frac{x^3}{6c^6}, which, as long as x\leq c, is accurate to at least 5 decimal places.
 
Millennial said:
Yes, just cut the first two terms. By the Lagrange form of the remainder, we obtain that an upper bound for the error can be given by \displaystyle \frac{x^{k+1}}{(k+1)!c^{2k+2}} in a Taylor polynomial of degree k. Taking k as two (the above case), we obtain that an upper bound of the error is \displaystyle \frac{x^3}{6c^6}, which, as long as x\leq c, is accurate to at least 5 decimal places.
That would be taking the first 3 terms, no? Sure, that should be fine, but the first two terms might be enough. How big is x/c2, and how accurate do you need the answer to be?
 
haruspex said:
That would be taking the first 3 terms, no? Sure, that should be fine, but the first two terms might be enough. How big is x/c2, and how accurate do you need the answer to be?

my answer would be in the range of 10^-11 eV.
 
Michio Cuckoo said:
my answer would be in the range of 10^-11 eV.
x/c2 has units? Doesn't seem right. What exactly does x represent?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
11K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K