Anonymous user
Talk:Feigenbaum constant calculation: Difference between revisions
m
→degree of accuracy with more precision during computing: added arrow pointing to last accurate decimal digit.
(→degree of accuracy with more precision during computing: added a comment about the calculations diverging.) |
m (→degree of accuracy with more precision during computing: added arrow pointing to last accurate decimal digit.) |
||
| (4 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 2:
The task would be improved if there was a clearer description of how to calculate the constant given than the hidden, math-centric Wikipedia text. The target audience are programmers, and a I think a given method of calculation would allow for better comparison of solutions. [[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 10:47, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
All the solutions seem to be based on the paper [http://keithbriggs.info/documents/how-to-calc.pdf How to calculate the Feigenbaum constants on your PC. Aust. Math. Soc. Gazette 16, 89.], from [http://keithbriggs.info Keith Briggs]. [[User:Laurence|Laurence]] ([[User talk:Laurence|talk]]) 18:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
==true value of Feigenbaum's constant==
Since the true value of Feigenbaum's constant isn't shown here on this Rosetta Code task, I added the displaying of it in the REXX example, along with the displaying of the number of correct decimal digits for each (<big>'''i'''</big>) iteration. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 06:28, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
[http://www.plouffe.fr/simon/constants/feigenbaum.txt Here] is the value of the Feigenbaum's constant up to 1,018 decimal places. [[User:Laurence|Laurence]] ([[User talk:Laurence|talk]]) 18:04, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
==degree of accuracy with more precision during computing==
Line 41 ⟶ 44:
24 0 -3.754125525
25 0 -0.09190415307
↑
true value= 4.669201609
</pre>
Line 74 ⟶ 77:
24 0 1.6761036199854529178
25 0 1.3068879789412108804
↑
true value= 4.6692016091029906719
</pre>
Line 107 ⟶ 110:
24 12 4.66920160910412904696305071057
25 9 4.66920160831045435278064326969
↑
true value= 4.66920160910299067185320382047
</pre>
Line 140 ⟶ 143:
24 14 4.669201609102987917842550686945063648103
25 16 4.669201609102990082109591039030679816186
↑
true value= 4.669201609102990671853203820466201617258
</pre>
Line 173 ⟶ 176:
24 14 4.6692016091029879178492459786120026677307662966576
25 16 4.6692016091029900820302890757279774163961895200742
↑
true value= 4.6692016091029906718532038204662016172581855774758
</pre>
Line 206 ⟶ 209:
24 14 4.66920160910298791784924597861351311575702672457052187681814
25 16 4.66920160910299008203028907572873571164451680641851773878632
↑
true value= 4.66920160910299067185320382046620161725818557747576863274565
</pre>
Line 237 ⟶ 240:
24 14 4.669201609102987917849245978613513115757246210043045367998209732838256
25 16 4.669201609102990082030289075728735711642616959039291006563095888962633
↑
true value= 4.669201609102990671853203820466201617258185577475768632745651343004134
</pre>
Line 270 ⟶ 273:
24 14 4.6692016091029879178492459786135131157572462100430915357209982548433093297570592
25 16 4.6692016091029900820302890757287357116426169590391741098422496772889977674631437
↑
true value= 4.6692016091029906718532038204662016172581855774757686327456513430041343302113147
</pre>
::Is the term 'true value' appropriate here? Increasing the number of digits results in more and more digits of this "constant". The true value may have an
<pre>
true value= 4.669201609
Line 291 ⟶ 294:
::: Showing the ''true value'' of <big><big><math>\pi</math></big></big> is in the same vein. It's only accurate (or true) up to the number of (decimal) digits for <big><big><math>\pi</math></big></big>, rounded to the number of decimal digits shown. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 02:56, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
::: Adding more decimal digits (for the REXX calculations) will result in more (accurate) digits of Feigenbaum constant, provided that enough iterations are used, ... up to some point. When that point is reached, the calculations start diverging and less (accurate) decimal digits are produced (calculated). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:20, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
| |||