MHB When 0.123....495051/0.515049....321

  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the first three figures after the decimal point in the expression of the fraction formed by two decimal numbers, specifically $$\frac{0.12345678910\cdots495051}{0.515049\cdots987654321}$$. Participants attempted various approaches, including creating tables of smaller fractions to identify patterns, but struggled to find a clear solution. One user noted that their calculations stabilized around 0.2396, suggesting that further approximations would not significantly alter the first three decimal places. Additionally, a calculus-based argument was presented to support the stability of the quotient's decimal representation. Overall, the thread highlights the complexity of the problem and the collaborative effort to derive a solution.
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Hello MHB,

Recently I've come across a problem that jumped off the page at me (Find the first 3 figures after the decimal point in the decimal expression of the number $$\frac{0.12345678910\cdots495051}{0.515049\cdots987654321}$$).

I tried to approach it by making a table where I started to divide some smaller numbers but stick to the same pattern that is required by the aforementioned problem, i.e.

$$\frac{0.12}{0.21}=0.571...$$

$$\frac{0.123}{0.321}=0.383...$$

$$\frac{0.1234}{0.4321}=0.285...$$

$$\frac{0.12345}{0.54321}=0.227...$$

$$\frac{0.123456}{0.654321}=0.188...$$

$$\frac{0.1234567}{0.7654321}=0.161...$$

$$\frac{0.12345678}{0.87654321}=0.140...$$

$$\frac{0.123456789}{0.987654321}=0.124...$$

$$\frac{0.12345678910}{0.10987654321}=0.123...$$

$$\frac{0.1234567891011}{0.1110987654321}=0.111...$$

$$\frac{0.123456789101112}{0.121110987654321}=0.019...$$

$$\frac{0.12345678910111213}{0.13121110987654321}=0.940...$$

$$\frac{0.1234567891011121314}{0.1413121110987654321}=0.873...$$

$$\frac{0.123456789101112131415}{0.151413121110987654321}=0.815...$$

$$\frac{0.12345678910111213141516}{0.16151413121110987654321}=0.764...$$

$$\frac{0.1234567891011121314151617}{0.1716151413121110987654321}=0.719...$$

$$\frac{0.123456789101112131415161718}{0.181716151413121110987654321}=0.679...$$

$$\frac{0.12345678910111213141516171819}{0.19181716151413121110987654321}=0.643...$$

$$\frac{0.1234567891011121314151617181920}{0.2019181716151413121110987654321}=0.611...$$

and so on and so forth

but I failed to observe any pattern that's worth mentioning to help me to crack the problem.Could anyone help me with this particular problem? Thanks in advance.
cleardot.gif
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I also approached it by making a table, but I started by using the most significant figures in the given denominator:

$$\frac{0.1}{0.5} = 0.2$$,

$$\frac{0.12}{0.51} = 0.2352\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.123}{0.515} = 0.2388\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.1234}{0.5150} = 0.2396\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.12345}{0.51504} = 0.2396\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.123456}{0.515049} = 0.2396\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.1234567}{0.5150494} = 0.2396\ldots$$,

$$\frac{0.12345678}{0.51504948} = 0.2396\ldots$$.

By this time, the fraction had stabilised (within the limits of my 8-digit calculator) to 0.2396987. I doubt whether further approximations would affect the first three digits after the decimal point.

Edit. You can confirm that by using a bit of calculus. If $f(x,y) = x/y$ then $\delta f \approx (1/y)\delta x - (x/y^2)\delta y$. With $x\approx 0.123$, $y\approx 0.515$ and $\delta x = \delta y = 10^{-n}$, you find that $\delta f < 2*10^{-n}$. So the change in the fraction after the eighth decimal places in numerator and denominator is never going to be sufficient to affect the first three decimal places in the quotient.
 
Last edited:
Hi Opalg,

I'm very thankful to you for showing me something that I had never thought about before and your solution and the proof work so beautifully...

Thank you so much!
 
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
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...
Back
Top