You are not logged in.

- Topics: Active | Unanswered

Pages: **1**

**Al-Allo****Member**- Registered: 2012-08-23
- Posts: 293

Can somebody tell me what is the meaning of this symbol :

Is it approximation ?

*Last edited by Al-Allo (2013-08-09 03:36:44)*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,251

Hi;

That means asymptotically equal to. Sometimes I see ~ meaning the same thing.

≈ means approximately.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%89%88

Even better:

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.

Offline

**Al-Allo****Member**- Registered: 2012-08-23
- Posts: 293

Thank you, even if I have no idea what It means xD But thanks again

*Last edited by Al-Allo (2013-08-09 03:52:47)*

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,251

It describes a limiting factor for instance

Stirlings approximation:

or

This means that as n approaches infinity the approximation on the right ( Stirling's ) gets better and better. ( loosely stated )

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.

Offline

**Al-Allo****Member**- Registered: 2012-08-23
- Posts: 293

Ahh, never seen this topic ... Anyway, Ill return to it another time. By the way, could you go see my topic in exercices please ??? thanks

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,251

This is more usually discussed in Numerical analysis and is not covered in the standard curriculum. Please understand to actually describe what that symbol means I would have to go into absolute error, relative error and actual error. Since it is not necessary for this discussion I stated it not very rigorously.

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.

Offline

**Al-Allo****Member**- Registered: 2012-08-23
- Posts: 293

It's ok, I won't bite you. I'll just return to it when I know more about those things.

Offline

**bobbym****Administrator**- From: Bumpkinland
- Registered: 2009-04-12
- Posts: 83,251

Hi;

Those cyber bites can hurt.

I did not want to confuse you with lots of jargon when it could be explained simply at the price of a little rigor.

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.

Offline

Pages: **1**