|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: Seuss]
#14756173 - 07/12/11 10:35 AM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: > Wow. That looks confusing and very difficult.
It is actually really simple and very powerful. Helps a lot if you understand RPN. After that, you do stuff like "5 4 + p" to print 5 + 4.
Yeah, RPN ftw. I mostly use my HP 49g+ if I'm doing more than a few simple calculations...
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: Annom]
#14756178 - 07/12/11 10:36 AM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Annom said: Do you also write symbolic RPN? As in formulas?
That seems like it would be rather bizarre...
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: ChuangTzu]
#14756248 - 07/12/11 10:55 AM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
> Do you also write symbolic RPN? As in formulas?
Not if I am working something on paper.
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
Doc_T
Random Dude




Registered: 03/06/09
Posts: 42,395
Loc: Colorado
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: Seuss]
#14758292 - 07/12/11 05:44 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: RPN
Make you feel big to use a notation nobody else does, hm? More of a man? I've got a slide rule around somewhere, if it turns up I'll mail it to you.
-------------------- You make it all possible. Doesn't it feel good?
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: Doc_T]
#14758898 - 07/12/11 07:32 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
RPN is the bomb. Lots of people who do science and engineering use it.
Ive reached for my HP-48g less since Ive got an RPN calculator app on my smartphone. Otherwise, if Im on a computer Ill use a spreadsheet or mathematica for even fairly simple calculations.
|
Sly Stone

Registered: 06/18/11
Posts: 595
Loc: Never get out of the boat
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: DieCommie]
#14758939 - 07/12/11 07:38 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I love RPN. I learned it programming my HP-41CX.
Edited by Sly Stone (07/12/11 08:32 PM)
|
johnm214


Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: DieCommie]
#14759568 - 07/12/11 09:42 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: RPN is the bomb. Lots of people who do science and engineering use it.
Where? My dad knows it, I guess he learned it in buisness school or something, but I don't know anyone except for engineers who use it.
Seems to me that modern calculators somewhat reduce the advantages of it. I just use a calaculator that allows the entry of long expressions containing multiple terms, and that has always worked well. The display shows the entire expression as if it had been written by hand, and makes things easier to see and keep track of when doing complex problems. (the display also shows the previous operations which allows you to check for problems and recall where you are in the calculation).
TI calculators are a rip off and they bribe schools to promote their use, but I still love my TI-89.
|
DieCommie

Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: johnm214]
#14759656 - 07/12/11 09:58 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
The display shows the entire expression as if it had been written by hand, and makes things easier to see and keep track of when doing complex problems.
Ugg, I hate entering long expressions like that with all the parenthesis. RPN is faster and easier than that, at least it is for those of us who like it. Its only good for algebra of course, I never feel the need to enter long algebraic expressions into a calculator. (If I do need to reduce some horrible algebraic expression, I would certainly go for my computer.)
I see RPN calculators around, in scientific and academic settings, offices and labs. Its certainly not prevalent, but you see them and recognize them as fellow users. (ThinkPads are the same way I think )
|
ChuangTzu
starvingphysicist



Registered: 09/04/02
Posts: 3,060
Last seen: 10 years, 7 months
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: DieCommie]
#14760016 - 07/12/11 11:00 PM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
DieCommie said: I see RPN calculators around, in scientific and academic settings, offices and labs. Its certainly not prevalent, but you see them and recognize them as fellow users. (ThinkPads are the same way I think )
Yeah, my experience is the same. You see a lot of HP calculators in physicists' offices...
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 3 months, 8 days
|
Re: can someone help me with this flawed proof that Pi=2 [Re: johnm214]
#14760947 - 07/13/11 05:24 AM (12 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seems to me that modern calculators somewhat reduce the advantages of it. I just use a calaculator that allows the entry of long expressions containing multiple terms, and that has always worked well.
To me, the advantage is in speed and the ability to manipulate the equation I am working with on the fly. Even simple things such as adding a list of numbers is "better" in RPN. I can enter all of the numbers onto the stack, glance to ensure all the numbers I entered are correct, then hit the + button a bunch of times to perform the summation. When working complex problems, I can leave partial calculations on the stack, do some other arithmetic, then come back to where I was. When working through an equation, I think in RPN even if that isn't how I write it on paper. To me, non-RPN calculators feel clunky and odd. Sure, I can use them, just as I can still use a slide ruler, but why would I want to?
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
|