Anonymous user
Talk:Arithmetic-geometric mean: Difference between revisions
Better for agm(x,y) than it is for agm(1,1/sqrt(2))
(→Trivial solution: most important--pfft) |
(Better for agm(x,y) than it is for agm(1,1/sqrt(2))) |
||
Line 6:
:: That was one of the most amazing paragraph to have ever graced RC, where except the first and the last, every sentence is wrong to some extent, and it was written sincerely (as far as I can tell). For one thing, who's to rate which constant is more important than others? π is named after Archimedes, e is named after Euler, not to mention stuff like 0 an 1 are so fundamental that they didn't even get the chance to be named after anybody. And how is Gauss's Constant "π in disguise"? Since we don't know if π and e are independent, your (16) in the reference isn't really all that helpful in establishing a crucial connection between π and Gauss's Constant, so it's not sensical to say "precision with which you can calculate Pi is then limited by ... this". It's fine to have a task to calculate the constant, but you don't need to hype it up all over the place. --[[User:Ledrug|Ledrug]] 17:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
::The main problem I have with the description as it is is that it is too vague for the goal of finding the value of a constant. If the task goal is to give that value then it's pretty trivial to just calculate it offline (or look it up) and print it as text straight up. If the task goal is to calculate a general arithmetic-geometric mean then it needs a rename and I would suggest using different numbers. It would be nice to have smaller-precision values so that languages with no arbitrary precision libraries can participate. --[[User:Mwn3d|Mwn3d]] 18:17, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
| |||