Timeline for Normality of $\pi$ in base 16
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:57 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://mathoverflow.net/ with https://mathoverflow.net/
|
|
| Apr 17, 2014 at 12:22 | vote | accept | R W | ||
| Apr 16, 2014 at 15:57 | comment | added | Timothy Chow | The significance of the BBP formula is not just that it yields an efficient algorithm, but that it yields an unexpectedly simple recurrence for the digits (up to an error term that is negligible as far as the normality question is concerned). Unfortunately the recurrence is still too difficult to analyze. | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 21:17 | answer | added | Timothy Chow | timeline score: 22 | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 19:14 | comment | added | Greg Martin | The difficulty, in my opinion, is that an algorithm for computing base-16 digits does not automatically lead to a way to analyze the distribution of the infinitely many outputs. For that matter, usual long division gives a perfectly good algorithm for computing the base-16 digits of $\pi$, yet that did not yield a proof of normality either. | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 18:23 | comment | added | Steven Stadnicki | @TheMaskedAvenger On the contrary, BBP is quate practical for arbitrary digits - I believe it was a spigot-style algorithm that was used to compute around the quadrillionth bit (see bbc.com/news/technology-11313194 for more details) | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 16:30 | comment | added | The Masked Avenger | It is unknown if pi is normal in any (natural number) base, much less all such bases. The BBP algorithm allows a relatively rapid way of computing an arbitrary hex digit of pi, although I think it is still not practical when one tries for the billionth hex digit. That's why 16 is important. | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 15:49 | comment | added | Włodzimierz Holsztyński | With respect to normality, how does 16 help? | |
| Apr 15, 2014 at 13:59 | history | asked | R W | CC BY-SA 3.0 |