Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
... this project is left as interpreted from insufficient information. Done SS 6179 ... would be wise to cross check other SS version [7019]. Project Fission.sm (153kb) downloaded 14 time(s).
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud ... this project is left as interpreted from insufficient information. Done SS 6179 ... would be wise to cross check other SS version [7019]. Project Fission.sm (153kb) downloaded 14 time(s). Hello Jean, Is this what you mean? Checked with version 7019, and plots do not work. |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: omorr Hello Jean,
Is this what you mean? Checked with version 7019, and plots do not work. Thanks Radovan. SS 7019 needs be be doctored quite seriously. What can be so hard to digest ? As it looks, SS 7019 does not recognize exponents < 10-15 If so: should be easy to fix ? If it tabulates the low exponents, then the plot is guilty, that does not make sense either ... Maybe too early to tag SS 7019 big toe a dead patient ! Cheers ... Jean
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
... Is there any red ? Copy/paste in IrfanView, Resize-Resample to enlarge the ^- I wish the paper shows some result or graph.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
SS 6179 ... exp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308 SS 7019 ... exp(709.782)= red or something
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud ... Is there any red ? Copy/paste in IrfanView, Resize-Resample to enlarge the ^- I wish the paper shows some result or graph. There are some results for the MeV matrix. When the numbers of rows j>11 the red is coming back. Although there are few differences between the pictures. Some numbers are zero on the first one contrary to some small numbers on the other one. Is there any significance of this? Regards, Radovan Edited by user 16 August 2019 12:25:18(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Thanks Radovan for your reply. YAF.NET refused to quote your message entirely ? 1. Does YAF.NET freaks the ranges to bracket format ? 2. Is it 7109 that freaks the ranges to bracket. 3. What does the bracket range format 7109 vs normal ranges 6179 ? That kind of problem was observed recently [from recollection NDTMA ?] What about re-code the ranges 7109 as per 6179 ? No more from the Originator [graph, results ...] Maybe not a public paper ... or home made for classroom ? More puzzling: more Doctors are gone fishing ... Cheers ... Jean
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 1,124 Was thanked: 506 time(s) in 337 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud
What about re-code the ranges 7109 as per 6179 ? No more from the Originator [graph, results ...] Maybe not a public paper ... or home made for classroom ? More puzzling: more Doctors are gone fishing ...
Cheers ... Jean
not related with ranges function. even rewriting as for(4) function, equation gives the same problematic result. I have downloaded several old versions and found the last working version is 0.99.6824. After this version there is none giving the expected result. Regards
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Hello Jean, I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...". The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] ( and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations. Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug. Regards, Radovan Edited by user 16 August 2019 16:39:54(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: omorr Hello Jean, I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...". The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] ( and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations. Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug. Regards, Radovan Simple: tag the big toe of all SS past 6179 Dead Bodiesexp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308 ... What do you get ? Have a good day [night] Radovan ... Jean
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Originally Posted by: omorr Hello Jean, I just put 11 in the range because any number greater than 11 will produce the famous error "...above max. positive number...". The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] ( and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations. Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug. Regards, Radovan Simple: tag the big toe of all SS past 6179 Dead Bodiesexp(709.782)=1.796412028*10^308 ... What do you get ? Have a good day [night] Radovan ... Jean Thank you Jean. All the best to you. |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: omorr The only thing I can figure out is that the version [7109] ( and some versions before) has some serious problems with float/symbolic calculations. Therefore I can consider this as a serious bug. My Kalkulator is older than my Mathcad 8 Pro. [2000] Does it suggest some profitable code ? Up until now, this bug hasn't been attended. How many more undiscovered ? Thanks Radovan for your dedication, sincerely ... Jean
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
... last brick in the wall.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud ... last brick in the wall. exp(709.782)=1.79641202802057*10^308 That's what it has to be checked first SS 7019 Next, wrt the long thread: if exp(x) OK then why it scraps the Originator project vs SS 6179 that does it. That revisit to insure the bug has not yet be incinerated. May be it should, being so little attractive.
|
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud Originally Posted by: Jean Giraud ... last brick in the wall. exp(709.782)=1.79641202802057*10^308 That's what it has to be checked first SS 7019 Next, wrt the long thread: if exp(x) OK then why it scraps the Originator project vs SS 6179 that does it. That revisit to insure the bug has not yet be incinerated. May be it should, being so little attractive. Helo Jean, From this thread, the examples and comments it is obvious that something is fishy here regarding that the same thing is working in the previous SMath versions but not in the recent ones. There is no answer from anyone yet what's wrong. Regards, Radovan |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 1,124 Was thanked: 506 time(s) in 337 post(s)
|
|
1 user thanked overlord for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Administration Groups: Registered, Advanced Member Joined: 23/06/2009(UTC) Posts: 1,740 Was thanked: 318 time(s) in 268 post(s)
|
Let me repeat my main point about this error which I believe it is a bug. It is not about exp() function. Please try in every software you want to calculate this simple addition of two small numbers. SMath will issue an error (with the rather confusing message) but every other software I tried will not. The result will be either zero or 1.5e-115. That is the point. Regards, Radovan Edited by user 21 August 2019 18:49:39(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
When Sisyphus climbed to the top of a hill, they said: "Wrong boulder!" |
1 user thanked omorr for this useful post.
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 23/07/2013(UTC) Posts: 1,124 Was thanked: 506 time(s) in 337 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: omorr Let me repeat my main point about this error which I believe it is a bug. It is not about exp() function. Please try in every software you want to calculate this simple addition of two small numbers. SMath will issue an error (with the rather confusing message) but every other software I tried will not. The result will be either zero or 1.5e-115. That is the point. Regards, Radovan You are right Radovan, this should be a bug. I have checked the addition on old versions. 0.99.7016 (and older versions) can calculate the mentioned additon, 0.99.7100 and after doesn't. Let me clarify something, exp(709.783) is still not calculated on 0.99.6824 too. But somehow the Project Fission.sm calculations can be done with 0.99.6824. There is some serious issues over here. Regards
|
|
|
|
Rank: Guest
Groups: Registered
Joined: 04/07/2015(UTC) Posts: 6,868 Was thanked: 980 time(s) in 808 post(s)
|
Originally Posted by: overlord Let me clarify something, exp(709.783) is still not calculated on 0.99.6824 too. The utmost limit 709.782 except Kalkulator and Casio from some method switching from exp(x) to some series. That kind of magnitude has certainly no interest. Why 7019 is bug ?
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member Groups: Registered
Joined: 14/10/2015(UTC) Posts: 308
Was thanked: 77 time(s) in 58 post(s)
|
The Free42 calculator for Android supports the value of 14,140 for the exp () function exp (14140) = 8.3941 E+6140 Best Regards Carlos
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.