Predict Digits of Irrational Numbers with Modular Arithmetic Summation?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion centers on the feasibility of predicting the digits of irrational numbers using modular arithmetic summation. The proposed equation involves a summation of a modular function of a Cartesian function, specifically targeting the digits less than 1 of the square root of a number, expressed as Summation; x=1, (inf) (integer(f(x))mod10)/(10x). The conversation highlights the use of the floor function, floor(x), to separate the integer part from the irrational result, such as sqrt(3), and suggests that this approach could potentially extend to other irrational numbers.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of modular arithmetic
  • Familiarity with the floor function and greatest integer function
  • Basic knowledge of irrational numbers and their properties
  • Experience with mathematical summation notation
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the implementation of the floor function in various programming languages
  • Explore advanced modular arithmetic techniques in number theory
  • Study algorithms for calculating digits of irrational numbers
  • Investigate the properties of other irrational numbers like e, π, and the golden ratio φ
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and anyone interested in number theory or algorithms for calculating irrational numbers will benefit from this discussion.

Chrono G. Xay
Messages
91
Reaction score
3
Would it be possible to write an equation utilizing a summation of a modular function of a Cartesian function, whose degree is dependent upon the index of the root, in that it predicts the digits less than 1 of the root, that when summed equals the computed value sqrt( n )?

I already have what feels like a basis upon which to start,

[Summation; x=1, (inf)] \frac{(integer(f(x))mod10)}{10x}

in that it would return such values as...

0.1 + 0.02 + 0.003 + 0.0004

but am having trouble coming up with an algorithm which would strip away, for example, the 1.0 from 1.732... in sqrt( 3 ) .

It seems as though even if such a thing were doable, it would have been nice to be able to say that, with the appropriate formulae for f(x), for one, it could compute the digits of any irrational number, except that for non-root irrational numbers, such as e, θ, φ, etc. the index is arguably one (given π is obtained from a quotient, and e is obtained from the limit of an exponential...)[/sup]
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Chrono G. Xay said:
but am having trouble coming up with an algorithm which would strip away, for example, the 1.0 from 1.732... in sqrt( 3 ) .
Use the floor function, also called the greatest integer function, and written as ##\lfloor x \rfloor##. The greatest integer in x is the largest integer that is less than or equal to x. For example, ##\lfloor 1.732 \rfloor = 1##.

To strip off the integer part, use ##x -\lfloor x \rfloor##. Some programming languages have floor() and ceil() as part of their standard libraries.
 
Ok. I thought that might have been it, but at the same time it felt like it might have been incorrect because I would be using a term of sqrt( x ), similar to

y = 2x - | y | ...

Ok, so now we have

n^(1/m) = floor(n^(1/m)) + (Summation; x=1, (inf)] \frac{(integer(f(x))mod10)}{10x} ...

Then again, shouldn't the greatest integer also be predictable by such an equation?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
  • Poll Poll
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
12K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
3K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
16K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
28K