Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ π -¹ ² ³ °

You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

It is not **a** Leibniz series. It is the Leibniz series. For pi.

pi/4=1-1/3+1/5-1/7+1/9-1/11+...-

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

You believe that RRA does not work here?

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

I am not sure. I never actually used the series left over. Instead I spotted a pattern in the terms that appear before the summation symbol and decided to use them.

Is the other part correct now?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

The RRA is not done on the series tail.

My confidence in the RRA was then shaken. But at least I tried to use it.

This is an error in judgement.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

Hi bobbym

I corrected myself about getting the number of terms in post #75.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

We will skip that right now but I will say that the RRA works fine on the Leibniz series.

It is the quoted part that contains the error now.

**In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.**

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

Well, the first sentence is a subjective observation, so it cannot contain an error. So the error must be in the second part. So you are saying either that I didn't apply the RRA at all or that I didn't apply it correctly.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

Your faith is shaken? This is incorrect on two counts.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

It cannot be. You cannot know what I feel.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

First of all, it works here so why is your faith shaken?

Second, you did not read the other posts. Numerical methods are not like the math you have been taught. How are they different?

You cannot know what I feel.

This is also incorrect. For 16 years it is what I did every day. Also I have talked to you here every day for more than a year. We are not so mysterious to each other. You know me well too.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

My faith is not important. It was shaken a little. That doesn't mean I wil never use RRA again.

I guess it is mostly intended for use by a computer.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

Post #86 has new stuff added.

How are they different?

I remember asking you this question.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

First, 16 years? Where does that come from?

Second, I remember answering that question. Second part of post 87.

Third, it is interesting that you claim to know me, but it is even more interesting to claim that I know you. I have much trouble evaluating your character and personality because of all the things you hide behind. And I am not referring just to your age. I am talking about hiding behind arrays of jokes and sarcastic comments.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

Sarcasm, I rarely use unless it is directed at GiB. Jokes, well I like to poke fun at things. You see from our viewpoint the world is not real enough to be taken seriously. It is an illusion. Joking is one way of taking the edge off. I did say young people have no sense of humor. Was I right?

Anyway, that is the wrong answer in post #87.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

You were not right. But your humor is not like normal sense of humor, in some ways. It is often a mean of evasion. That is the main obstacle that disables me to understand you as much as I should.

I remember us mentioning many differences between numerical and school book methods. One of them was also that when applying numerical methods we shouldn't always expect to get an answer.

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

One of them was also that when applying numerical methods we shouldn't always expect to get an answer.

Exact a mundo! That is why there is no loss of faith.

That is the main obstacle that disables me to understand you as much as I should.

There is no reason for you to understand me. We can function here without it. You do not need my age, my picture, my anything. Because of your age I am unable to explain to you why I do the things I do. Why I feel they are necessary.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**

**anonimnystefy****Real Member**- From: The Foundation
- Registered: 2011-05-23
- Posts: 14,860

I do not want your age, picture or anything except that you show yourself and your real character from time to time.

But, again, you are, as always contradicting yourself. You say that you do not expect me to know you, but you said that I know you.

And what was the 16 years all about?

Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 82,753

I already explained that to you at length.

You say that you do not expect me to know you, but you said that I know you.

That is not contradictory. I do not expect many things that happen to me.

I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it.

All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof.

**Online**