Post Reply 
No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
08-20-2023, 08:49 PM (This post was last modified: 08-20-2023 08:51 PM by Matt Agajanian.)
Post: #1
No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
Hi.

I’m thinking the pros here (all MoHPC folks) have more insights.

On the easy side, even both editions of the Casio fx-115ES feature the multi-statement : feature. So, if the CW and a 991 at that is supposed to be an up-step from the 115, why would Casio not feature the : multi-statement feature?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-25-2023, 06:45 PM (This post was last modified: 08-25-2023 06:47 PM by celltx.)
Post: #2
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
(08-20-2023 08:49 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  I’m thinking the pros here (all MoHPC folks) have more insights.

Regarding the pros, it appears that CW series is more profitable for Casio, judging by the recent quarterly earnings report:

https://world.casio.com/content/dam/casi...24_1st.pdf
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-25-2023, 09:26 PM
Post: #3
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
(08-25-2023 06:45 PM)celltx Wrote:  
(08-20-2023 08:49 PM)Matt Agajanian Wrote:  I’m thinking the pros here (all MoHPC folks) have more insights.

Regarding the pros, it appears that CW series is more profitable for Casio, judging by the recent quarterly earnings report:

https://world.casio.com/content/dam/casi...24_1st.pdf

Best idea for me that I have reinforcement—Both 115ES Plus editions, 991ES Plus 2nd Edition, and the incredible 991EX.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-26-2023, 01:06 AM
Post: #4
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
I guess that Casio thought the either the multi statement colon wasn't used enough or school restrictions.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-26-2023, 04:35 AM
Post: #5
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
(08-26-2023 01:06 AM)Eddie W. Shore Wrote:  I guess that Casio thought the either the multi statement colon wasn't used enough or school restrictions.

At least the multi-statement : is still included in the fx-7400GIII, fx-9750GIII and fx-9860GIII

Tom L
Cui bono?
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-26-2023, 05:48 PM
Post: #6
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
Pardon my ignorance…what is a multi statement function? I wonder if the 991CW has a workaround…I can define g(x) to include a reference to f(x)…
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-26-2023, 06:36 PM (This post was last modified: 08-26-2023 06:39 PM by Albert Chan.)
Post: #7
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
Hi, Irdheat

Multi-statements is like a program.

Here is an example, calculating ellipse perimeter via AGM
note: for FX-115MS, B = √AB means B = √(A*B)

(01-23-2020 01:40 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  
(01-21-2020 05:16 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  \(\large p(a,b) = 2× \left( p({a+b \over 2}, \sqrt{ab}) - {\pi a b \over AGM(a,b)}\right)\)

In other words, calculate ellipse perimeter from a much less eccentric ellipse.

Using my Casio FX-115MS, AGM2 method for Halley's comet, numbers from here

A = 2667950000
B = 678281900
C = A²
D = B²
E = 0.5

F=B-A : C=C-EF² : B=√AB : A=A+F/2 : E=2E

Keep pressing "=" until F=0 (so that A,B,C all converged)

\(\large\pi\)(C+D)/B       → ellipse perimeter = 11,464,318,984.1 km
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-26-2023, 06:51 PM
Post: #8
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
Thanks!
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
08-27-2023, 07:08 PM
Post: #9
RE: No multi-statement 991CW—It’s peculiar
(08-26-2023 06:36 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  Hi, Irdheat

Multi-statements is like a program.

Here is an example, calculating ellipse perimeter via AGM
note: for FX-115MS, B = √AB means B = √(A*B)

(01-23-2020 01:40 PM)Albert Chan Wrote:  Using my Casio FX-115MS, AGM2 method for Halley's comet, numbers from here

A = 2667950000
B = 678281900
C = A²
D = B²
E = 0.5

F=B-A : C=C-EF² : B=√AB : A=A+F/2 : E=2E

Keep pressing "=" until F=0 (so that A,B,C all converged)

\(\large\pi\)(C+D)/B       → ellipse perimeter = 11,464,318,984.1 km

Now I have another formula for my 115s & 991s. And a superb CALC example also.

Plus, it’ll make for another program for my 34, 67, and 42.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: