• Gordon Calhoun@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        3 days ago

        Ugh, 3 factorial is most definitely not equal to π. It’s something more like, idk, 9? Honestly I don’t even know how I got here; I majored in Latin and barely past

          • Gordon Calhoun@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            3 days ago

            e = π = σ = ε = µ = Avogadro’s Number = k = g = G = α = i = j = 3

            (at least that’s how they all look when viewed from ∞)

            • andros_rex@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 days ago

              Shouldn’t have i in there, or j if you’re using that to represent the imaginary number. The complex plane is separate.

              Let epsilon be substantially greater than zero…

                • andros_rex@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 days ago

                  Imaginary numbers are best understood as symbolizing rotation. If we’re imagining a number line here, “looking back from infinity” - at a scale where Grahams number looks like the mass of an atom expressed in kilograms, i would not be in that infinite set of numbers, it would be a point above that line and creating a perpendicular plane to it.

                  I hate the term “imaginary” because it’s misleading. Most high school algebra teachers don’t understand what they are either, so people learn about these things called “imaginary” numbers, never learn any applications with them, hopefully graph them at best, and then move on understanding nothing new about math.

                  Students also tend to get really confused about it as possibly a variable, (it’s really annoying with in second year algebra courses, where e and logs also show up). We say “ah yeah, if you get a negative sign, just pull it out as an i and don’t worry about it. or just say no real solutions.”

  • deranger@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    Numbers like that are why I quit majoring in mechanical engineering. Physics took the beauty of math and made it ugly.

    You knew something was wrong in calculus when you got a fucked up coefficient that wasn’t a nice number.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      After calculus though, they just expect you to cope with fucked up coefficients. In Diff Eq, sometimes you do just get something like 3/111 cos (6/111 x). It gets harder to come up with examples that work out with nice integers.

      Physics can also have some really beautiful math, look at Lissajous figures. Once you understand the connections between e, the imaginary plane, and sine/cosine, you get some profound understandings about how electric and magnetic fields work.

  • hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    3 days ago

    The only application I can think of off the top of my head that would require that precision is a R2R DAC.

    Just sort through a bin until you find one.

  • A_A@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Quantum Ampere Standard
    https://www.nist.gov/noac/technology/current-and-voltage/quantum-ampere-standard
    .
    there also been research for defining a quantum volt and quantumly stable resistors

    https://www.nist.gov/noac/technology/current-and-voltage
    Quantum-based measurements for voltage and current are moving toward greater miniaturization

    P.S. :
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Hall_effect
    Quantum Hall effect →
    Applications →
    Electrical resistance standards :

    (…) Later, the 2019 revision of the SI fixed exact values of h and e, resulting in an exact
    RK = h/e2 = 25812.80745… Ω.

    (this is precise to at least 10 significant digits)