Post Reply 
negative number raised to even power
05-08-2015, 04:31 AM
Post: #81
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-07-2015 10:40 AM)Gerald H Wrote:  
(05-06-2015 07:56 PM)Wes Loewer Wrote:  -2^2 = (a) -4 (b) 4
2^3^2 = (a) 512 (b) 64
1/2pi = (a) 1.57 (b) 0.159
...
??-: Lotus 123 (can someone test this)
ab-: Lotus Improv (anybody remember this spreadsheet?)

Lotus 123, 2.4: aba

Thanks, I suspected it would be ab.

I should have explained what I was testing on the last one: 1/2pi. On Casio's, older TIs, and some software, implied multiplication is given a higher priority than explicit multiplication and division. They treat 1/2pi as 1/(2*pi) but 1/2*pi as (1/2)*pi. I put dashes for things that don't support implied multiplication.

Am I correct that 123 requires explicit multiplication like other spreadsheets?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 05:15 AM
Post: #82
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 02:27 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  I find it much more elegant to consider the negation prefix as an inseparable part of the number [...]
It isn't, since you cannot consistently do what generations of studens did before: Rewriting an equation

-2^2 = -4

to

0 = -4 + 2^2

I bet most people would just do it this way without giving it a second thought.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 11:14 AM
Post: #83
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 05:15 AM)Thomas Radtke Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 02:27 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  I find it much more elegant to consider the negation prefix as an inseparable part of the number [...]
It isn't, since you cannot consistently do what generations of studens did before: Rewriting an equation

-2^2 = -4

to

0 = -4 + 2^2

I bet most people would just do it this way without giving it a second thought.

Yeah, that does make for an ugly little pitfall. Maybe we need to just start writing it like fractions/division: base under the caret, power directly over it. Then you'd have to either put the negation sign unambiguously next to either operand, or the caret itself.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 11:42 AM
Post: #84
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 04:31 AM)Wes Loewer Wrote:  
(05-07-2015 10:40 AM)Gerald H Wrote:  Lotus 123, 2.4: aba

Thanks, I suspected it would be ab.

I should have explained what I was testing on the last one: 1/2pi. On Casio's, older TIs, and some software, implied multiplication is given a higher priority than explicit multiplication and division. They treat 1/2pi as 1/(2*pi) but 1/2*pi as (1/2)*pi. I put dashes for things that don't support implied multiplication.

Am I correct that 123 requires explicit multiplication like other spreadsheets?

Yes, actual entry was 1/2*@PI as 1/2@PI produces an error.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 01:56 PM
Post: #85
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 11:14 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  Maybe we need to just start writing it like fractions/division: base under the caret, power directly over it. Then you'd have to either put the negation sign unambiguously next to either operand, or the caret itself.
I know RPN-people like to save strokes of any kind, but there are brackets to make it clear and to keep the set of symbols orthogonal ;-).
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 02:03 PM
Post: #86
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 01:56 PM)Thomas Radtke Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 11:14 AM)Dave Britten Wrote:  Maybe we need to just start writing it like fractions/division: base under the caret, power directly over it. Then you'd have to either put the negation sign unambiguously next to either operand, or the caret itself.
I know RPN-people like to save strokes of any kind, but there are brackets to make it clear and to keep the set of symbols orthogonal ;-).

Hey, we've got two division symbols, with one intended to prevent ambiguity, so let's do the same with powers.

Or better yet, no more powers. Only EXP(Y*LN(X)).

(This is all more proof that RPN is better.)
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 03:21 PM
Post: #87
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 02:03 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  (This is all more proof that RPN is better.)
By far!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 03:23 PM
Post: #88
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 03:21 PM)Thomas Radtke Wrote:  
(05-08-2015 02:03 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  (This is all more proof that RPN is better.)
By far!

I alert you to post #7 in this thread.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-08-2015, 04:08 PM
Post: #89
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 02:03 PM)Dave Britten Wrote:  (This is all more proof that RPN is better.)

This proof more all is that RPN better is, to say you meant?

<0|ɸ|0>
-Joe-
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-09-2015, 12:52 AM
Post: #90
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-08-2015 04:08 PM)Joe Horn Wrote:  This proof more all is that RPN better is, to say you meant?

That would have been funnier four days ago.

Ceci n'est pas une signature.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-09-2015, 10:56 AM
Post: #91
RE: negative number raised to even power
Grammars Joe from, laughter it caused. Humorous, he is!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
05-09-2015, 11:48 AM
Post: #92
RE: negative number raised to even power
May the forth be with you, Joeda. I bet this joke has been made before, but ... CNR.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
10-10-2015, 04:12 PM
Post: #93
RE: negative number raised to even power
(05-03-2015 04:47 PM)Dirk. Wrote:  Hi,
checking three "algebraic" calculators for the -2²-bug leads to interesing results:

CASIO CFX-9850GB PLUS:
There is no (+/-)-key but a special (-)-key to change sign. The algebraic (-)-sign of a number can be distinguished from the (-)-operation by a shorter symbol in front of the number.
*) 2(-)² -> Syn ERROR
*) -2² -> -4

SHARP EL-512S and SHARP EL-520V:
Both also have a special character so distingusih subtration from negarive numbers when pressing (+/-) to change sign.
*) 2(+/-)² -> -2² -> 4 at the EL-512
*) 2(+/-)² -> (-2)² -> 4 at the EL-520
*) (+/-)2² -> -2² -> 4
Pressing the (-)-key as the first key of a calculation leads to "0-" in the algebraic line of the display (on the prime it leads to "ANS-")
*) -2² -> 0-2² -> -4

-> On SHARP calculators it works like expected. The 520 even adds the brackets automatically to make this point even more clear.
Adding brackets to "explain" how a result is obtained seems an excellent idea.
Much clearer than expecting a user to see a difference between two minus signs - and knowing which is which and how to translate that onto a system having just one, in order to use a calculation.


I had thought I knew what -2^2 was, now I simply don't - and I would never have read -2^2 in C and thought EXOR rather than exponentiate.

Stephen Lewkowicz (G1CMZ)
https://my.numworks.com/python/steveg1cmz
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 4 Guest(s)