ICEINSPACE
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
Waning Gibbous 91.3%
|
|
04-12-2021, 12:21 PM
|
|
Don't have a cow, Man!
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 1,097
|
|
Maths Numpty
Guys and gals,
Can some one please explain how I read or interpret a number, e.g. for processing given as weight, of 8.7638e+01?
Maybe I should have paid more attention at school, but as they say, "edumacashun neva dun me nun gud"
Cheers and clears.
|
04-12-2021, 12:49 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 494
|
|
Means 8.7638 x (10 to the power of). For example 8.7638e+2 is 8.7638 x(10 to the power of 2) 8.7638 x (10 squared) or 8.7638 x 100.
|
04-12-2021, 12:51 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,929
|
|
Hi Bart,
Take the part that appears before the e, in this case 8.7638
Now look at the part after the e. They are powers of ten. So in this case e+01 is 10 to the power of 1 which is 10.
Now multiply that first number by that 10.
So 8.7638e+01 is 8.7638 times 10 or 87.638
Background.
The e stands for exponent or exponential.
It originated as a way to enter "floating point numbers", that is numbers that have a decimal point, in early programming languages
such as FORTRAN. The keyboards didn't have any easy way to enter a superscript so this notation made it possible to specify these types of
numbers in the program. It persists today in most programming languagess.
Last edited by gary; 05-12-2021 at 02:09 PM.
|
04-12-2021, 01:32 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,453
|
|
Ok, that is all fine but surly it could have been written in a less complicated way, just saying
Leon
|
04-12-2021, 01:50 PM
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25,788
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Maybe I should have paid more attention at school, but as they say, "edumacashun neva dun me nun gud"
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
Ok, that is all fine but surly it could have been written in a less complicated way, just saying
Leon
|
You mean like this Leon?
"edumacashun neva dun me nun gud" x 0 = 0
|
04-12-2021, 04:31 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Mt. Kuring-Gai
Posts: 5,929
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
Ok, that is all fine but surly it could have been written in a less complicated way, just saying
Leon
|
Hi Leon,
Try writing down 9.28304823e+97 long hand and then come back to us and
let us know which is the least complicated.
Just saying.
|
04-12-2021, 05:29 PM
|
|
ze frogginator
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 22,062
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary
Hi Leon,
Try writing down 9.28304823e+97 long hand and then come back to us and
let us know which is the least complicated.
Just saying.
|
Did you hear that loud bang in the background? That was Leon's laptop experiencing a stack overflow. Hang on a sec... is that binary smoke signals I see rising on the horizon?
|
04-12-2021, 05:34 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Kelvin Grove
Posts: 1,300
|
|
Scientific Notation allows us to deal with very large or very small numbers, at whatever precision we need. When writing on paper, we can easily write the "10" and the raised exponent (as a superscript), and we can also do this when using a word-processing application, but it's not always possible in a plain-text editor - e.g. I'm not sure how to do it in the "Ice In Space" forum editor.
The "E" notation was developed in the 1950s or 1960s, when computer input terminals and punched cards only had the basic ASCII character-set - no Greek symbols, no "WingDings" or emojis, and no superscripts or subscripts, etc. It's still widely used today, because it can be printed or displayed unambiguously on any printer or device screen - and most people with a basic maths education know how to read it.
Try entering a very large or very small number in Excel, and you'll see it expressed using the "E" notation.
|
05-12-2021, 06:43 AM
|
|
Novichok test rabbit
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
Ok, that is all fine but surly it could have been written in a less complicated way, just saying
Leon
|
Surly? Surely that means you are cranky about it? Surely not. Dose it? (maybe it does)
Edumakated me isn't
|
05-12-2021, 07:47 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,832
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM
Surly? Surely that means you are cranky about it? Surely not. Dose it? (maybe it does)
Edumakated me isn't
|
Four years ago I couldn't even spell enjineer, now I are one
Graffiti seen in Monash Uni Engineering toilet cubicle.....
|
05-12-2021, 08:24 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,453
|
|
|
05-12-2021, 08:49 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Daruka
Posts: 394
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by leon
|
Haha. It’s only a matter of time Leon!
|
05-12-2021, 09:20 AM
|
.....
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,976
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bart
Can some one please explain how I read or interpret a number, e.g. for processing given as weight, of 8.7638e+01?
|
Hi Bart,
It's as others have said, 8.7638 multiplied by 10 to the power of 1 (or exponent 1), which equals 87.638. The e is for exponent typically to the usual base 10. It's use is more of one that has grown from its use in earlier programming languages, rather than pure mathematics per se. Unfortunately on most modern keyboards it can't be typed as easily as you can write it.....
In mathematics e, sometimes called Euler's number is an irrational number constant and the base of the natural logarithm, roughly equal to a constant of around 2.718.... . Whilst it's understood in the above example based on context to be as suggested above, I think if you need to write an exponent using a non superscripting device like a typical modern keyboard, that it's better to write it using the circumflex or caret symbol ^. It suggests "pointing up" and so is perhaps a little more intuitive and allows one to specify the base, in this case base 10. In your example it would read..... 8.736 x10^1.
Using the caret/circumflex symbol is better as it wont be potentially confused with e, the base of the natural logarithm/Euler's number. Of course there's no substitute for the clarity of superscript version as written above. You can do it with superscripting in most word processors / formulae editors. What's interesting is that on ye olde typewriters you could do a half line shift upwards and then type the exponent.
Best
JA
|
05-12-2021, 10:12 AM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Warrnambool
Posts: 12,453
|
|
Wow JA you are cleverer than me, and i am still confused, we didn't do math like that when i was a kid.
But that was along time ago, some 60 years.
Leon
|
05-12-2021, 11:45 AM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,461
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM
Surly? Surely that means you are cranky about it? Surely not. Dose it? (maybe it does)
Edumakated me isn't
|
https://youtu.be/WvCQ80Brkw0
https://youtu.be/KM2K7sV-K74
|
05-12-2021, 06:57 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 7,866
|
|
|
05-12-2021, 07:53 PM
|
|
Don't have a cow, Man!
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Posts: 1,097
|
|
LOL! Thanks everyone, that really helps.
I wish we had a like button, there were a few comments that were quite funny.
Poor Leon, you do cop a bit, hey!
|
05-12-2021, 09:40 PM
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: margaret river, western australia
Posts: 6,070
|
|
Don't put yourself down Leon. JA is not necessarily any cleverer than you. He obviously was taught a higher level of maths than you [and many other people], but maybe for whatever reason, you never had the opportunity to undertake the same level of schooling.
raymo
Last edited by raymo; 05-12-2021 at 09:41 PM.
Reason: correction
|
06-12-2021, 12:03 AM
|
|
Ebotec Alpeht Sicamb
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Toongabbie, NSW
Posts: 1,965
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by gary
Try writing down 9.28304823e+97 long hand and then come back to us and
let us know which is the least complicated.
|
Haha Gary, you made me wonder about the significance of that number. It certainly is many magnitudes above the estimated number of particles (quarks) in the universe
Last edited by Steffen; 06-12-2021 at 12:20 AM.
Reason: tpyos
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT +10. The time is now 09:17 AM.
|
|