Timeline for What is... a grossone?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
11 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 2016 at 19:10 | comment | added | Vladimir Kanovei | Is $\frac1{x+1}$ more complicated than $(x^{14}−2.8+3x^{−.3})/(5x^{7.2}+2.4x^{−3.1})$? Just interesting. | |
| Jan 5, 2016 at 12:53 | comment | added | André Henriques | @katz, whether the Infinity Calculator is just a Puiseux series calculator (truncated to a certain precision level), or whether it can handle more complicated expressions (such as $\frac{1}{x+1}$, or maybe even $x^{x^2}+x$) is something that I cannot judge based on the available information. | |
| Jan 5, 2016 at 7:55 | comment | added | Mikhail Katz | @AndréHenriques, can you reply to Daniel's question? | |
| Jan 5, 2016 at 6:26 | comment | added | Vladimir Kanovei | To identify g1 with something mathematically well-defined, one needs first to have the g1 itself mathematically well-defined. | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 19:50 | comment | added | Daniel Moskovich | Is this observation regarding to the Puiseux series related to Charles Stewart's observation identifying grossone with generalized "rational exponential expressions"? | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 16:31 | comment | added | Vladimir Kanovei | I see. Therefore it is to be concluded that the crucial value of the Infinity Calculator over the Puiseux series is that it ignores +. | |
| Jan 4, 2016 at 10:11 | comment | added | André Henriques | This looks very much like the computation of the Puiseux series expansion of the quotient $(x^{14}-2.8+3x^{-.3})/(5x^{7.2}+2.4x^{-3.1})$, except that the variable $x$ is replaced by the weird symbol ①. On my computer, I get $(x^{14}-2.8+3x^{-.3})/(5x^{7.2}+2.4x^{-3.1})=.2x^{6.8}-.096x^{-3.5}-.56x^{-7.2}+.6x^{-7.5}+...$ | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 20:19 | comment | added | Vladimir Kanovei | To my utter disappointment, all attempts to reach the cited www page for help with the screenshot went unsuccessful: the server www.spacephys.ru has been closed. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 14:46 | comment | added | Mikhail Katz | The problem seems to be that the "right operand" in the top right box does not contain a summation symbol and therefore should have resulted in an "error" message if this was truly a screenshot of a real calculation using the alleged "infinity calculator". the fact that the drawing does not report an "error" would appear to indicate that the calculation was in reality never performed. This indicates that the drawing is not that of an actual calculation performed on an alleged calculator. | |
| Jan 3, 2016 at 13:25 | history | edited | Vladimir Kanovei | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Jan 3, 2016 at 9:16 | history | answered | Vladimir Kanovei | CC BY-SA 3.0 |