TI59 Diagnostic forensics

07282020, 08:35 PM
Post: #21




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07282020 06:55 PM)rprosperi Wrote:(07282020 04:47 PM)Paul Berger (Canada) Wrote: How did you get that result on a 67? I have tried a few times now and always end up with 0 Ok one thing to keep in mind that on the TI59 for the polar to rectangular and rectangular to polar conversions when entering in polar you enter the magnitude first and move that to the t register and then enter the angle and do the conversion and when you covert back to polar the angle 30 is in the x register. This is what a trace on the program on the TI59 looks like note the order of execution is not obvious looking at the formula posted. Code:


07282020, 08:49 PM
Post: #22




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07282020 07:01 PM)rprosperi Wrote: [Actually of course after POL(REC(30,5)), X contains 30.00012692. Actually the TI diagnostic programme multiplies the result of your keystroke listing by 1E10 before testing it. See my first post, 2nd inequality. Thus the 67 would output 1.2692E6 versus 0.7 with the 59. Wow! I just checked again, result is 0.7 after multiplication with 1E10. The programme precisely tests if integer(error x 1E10)=0, thus taking the absolute error value. 

07282020, 09:52 PM
(This post was last modified: 07282020 09:54 PM by Paul Berger (Canada).)
Post: #23




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07282020 06:55 PM)rprosperi Wrote:(07282020 04:47 PM)Paul Berger (Canada) Wrote: How did you get that result on a 67? I have tried a few times now and always end up with 0 As previously mentioned on the TI59 the terms for the polar format number is the reverse of the 67, on a TI59 after the P>R and R>P conversions you end up with 30 in the x register, so to work like the t159 after you do the R>P conversion press x<>y to get 30 into x. The other thing is in your list above the P>R conversion should be f1 not g2, g2 is conversion to radians. Paul. 

07282020, 09:57 PM
Post: #24




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07282020 08:49 PM)Pjwum Wrote:(07282020 07:01 PM)rprosperi Wrote: [Actually of course after POL(REC(30,5)), X contains 30.00012692. So, all that makes sense as I've thought the 59 had better accuracy than the 67. I don't have the 59 listing handy, so was not sure what that was about, and missed the initial comments about multiplying the result. So, actually less impressive than I initially thought; I presumed they were manipulating numbers to actually come up with the .888888888 result. Bob Prosperi 

07282020, 10:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 07282020 10:10 PM by rprosperi.)
Post: #25




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07282020 09:52 PM)Paul Berger (Canada) Wrote:(07282020 06:55 PM)rprosperi Wrote: Keystrokes: Thanks Paul! I ran this probably 10 times, and got alternately the 0 and the above, and could not find why. They should never have put R<>P and D<>R so close together on the keyboard, this is not the first time this got me. So, yes, on the 67 it is indeed 0. I suppose I should go correct the listing [Now done] since the original has been quoted and for all time will show this error . How humbling... Bob Prosperi 

07292020, 07:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 07292020 07:47 PM by johanw.)
Post: #26




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07272020 03:51 PM)Pjwum Wrote:  5<30 stands for the polar notation of length 5 and 30 degrees (didn't find the suitable TeXcommand).I know of 3: \angle, \measuredangle and \sphericalangle: \begin{equation} error = pol(rec(5 \measuredangle 30)) \end{equation} (07282020 10:09 AM)Werner Wrote: RCL59 on iOS, which, as far as I know, is an emulator, not a simulator, returns 0 for (in Deg mode):I once tried to recreate a known error of the TI59 on the Android version and could not, when I mailed the author he said that he uses floating point math and did not try to recreate numerical errors of the original. 

07292020, 08:49 PM
Post: #27




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics  
07302020, 02:11 PM
Post: #28




RE: TI59 Diagnostic forensics
(07292020 07:46 PM)johanw Wrote:I was thrown off scent because SIN(45°)COS(45°) is not zero, as in the orginal, I think. (lost my '58 somewhere)(07282020 10:09 AM)Werner Wrote: RCL59 on iOS, which, as far as I know, is an emulator, not a simulator, returns 0 for (in Deg mode):I once tried to recreate a known error of the TI59 on the Android version and could not, when I mailed the author he said that he uses floating point math and did not try to recreate numerical errors of the original. Werner 

« Next Oldest  Next Newest »

User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)