• abcd@feddit.orgEnglish
    66·
    2 days ago

    Without using fancy components: Just simply adding a 6.2 and a 2400 Ohm resistor in parallel already gives you 6.18402 Ohm ⚡️

      • Gordon Calhoun@lemmy.world
        32·
        2 days ago

        Ugh, 3 factorial is most definitely not equal to π. It’s something more like, idk, 9? Honestly I don’t even know how I got here; I majored in Latin and barely past

            • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
              2·
              2 days ago

              My high school English teacher still has night terrors about me starting sentences with conjunctions. And that was the least of their problems.

              Edit: kind of unrelated, but that song about conjunctions is now stuck in my head. 🎶Conjunction junction, what’s your function? 🎶

            • weker01@sh.itjust.works
              1·
              1 day ago

              Erm. In what world do you live that the precedent in your expression is right?

              In all languages and countries I know multiplication binds more strongly than addition. So what you wrote would be

              n^2 - n - 2n - 3n…

          • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orgEnglish
            3·
            2 days ago

            Seriously, if you’re working with analog electronics, 𝛑=√1̅0̅ is close enough. If you need more precision, use active error correction, and in the 21st century that’s easiest to do digitally anyway.

          • Gordon Calhoun@lemmy.world
            8·
            2 days ago

            e = π = σ = ε = µ = Avogadro’s Number = k = g = G = α = i = j = 3

            (at least that’s how they all look when viewed from ∞)

            • andros_rex@lemmy.world
              1·
              2 days ago

              Shouldn’t have i in there, or j if you’re using that to represent the imaginary number. The complex plane is separate.

              Let epsilon be substantially greater than zero…

                • andros_rex@lemmy.world
                  2·
                  1 day ago

                  Imaginary numbers are best understood as symbolizing rotation. If we’re imagining a number line here, “looking back from infinity” - at a scale where Grahams number looks like the mass of an atom expressed in kilograms, i would not be in that infinite set of numbers, it would be a point above that line and creating a perpendicular plane to it.

                  I hate the term “imaginary” because it’s misleading. Most high school algebra teachers don’t understand what they are either, so people learn about these things called “imaginary” numbers, never learn any applications with them, hopefully graph them at best, and then move on understanding nothing new about math.

                  Students also tend to get really confused about it as possibly a variable, (it’s really annoying with in second year algebra courses, where e and logs also show up). We say “ah yeah, if you get a negative sign, just pull it out as an i and don’t worry about it. or just say no real solutions.”

  • deranger@sh.itjust.works
    481·
    2 days ago

    Numbers like that are why I quit majoring in mechanical engineering. Physics took the beauty of math and made it ugly.

    You knew something was wrong in calculus when you got a fucked up coefficient that wasn’t a nice number.

    • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      46·
      2 days ago

      Numbers like that should have been why you kept going in mech E.

      Once you get past the educational stage, every one of those calculations becomes “OK now round to the closest whole number that gives you the larger factor of safety and move on”

      • deranger@sh.itjust.works
        32·
        2 days ago

        Eh, it’s just fundamentally ugly to me and that really turned me off. Rounding doesn’t help, that’s like turning the lights off for sex to make it better. I still know the ugliness exists, even if I don’t see it.

        Engineering is still very cool to me, and I have huge respect for those who do it, but I’d never have made it. It’s physics but even further perverted by reality. Math was beautiful to me because of how “pure” it was. Just straight logic, divorced from the messy world we live in. Tidy coefficients and elegant derivations.

        • applebusch@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
          11·
          2 days ago

          I have to hard disagree with you there. The beauty of the math equations they test you with in school is completely artificially selected. The vast majority of math does not have nice neat solutions. There is a lot of it that doesn’t have any solution at all. The beauty of engineering is figuring out how much of things you actually need. You might calculate that some quantity should be an irrational number for some design optimum, but the amount of precision you actually need will be some range around that. When you do that and see your design in the real world actually functioning, that’s the greatest feeling in the world by far.

          • deranger@sh.itjust.works
            6·
            2 days ago

            Not knocking people’s choices, it just wasn’t for me. If math in reality isn’t math in education, it’s even better that I left.

            I’ll still contend math is much more elegant than physics or engineering, though. There’s no e^I*pi + 1 = 0 equivalent for either.

      • GoatTnder@lemmy.world
        7·
        1 day ago

        I’ve heard a story (so like 4th hand at this point) where an astrophysicist was talking about galaxy rotations or something. “And for this model, we can simplify pi to 10.”

        • JuxtaposedJaguar@lemmy.ml
          2·
          1 day ago

          My thermodynamics professor made so approximations in his derivations that all of his equations had an “O” term to represent the inaccuracy. Every time he made another approximation he’d say “and, of course, the O sucks up the error”.

    • andros_rex@lemmy.world
      10·
      2 days ago

      After calculus though, they just expect you to cope with fucked up coefficients. In Diff Eq, sometimes you do just get something like 3/111 cos (6/111 x). It gets harder to come up with examples that work out with nice integers.

      Physics can also have some really beautiful math, look at Lissajous figures. Once you understand the connections between e, the imaginary plane, and sine/cosine, you get some profound understandings about how electric and magnetic fields work.

  • hardcoreufo@lemmy.world
    10·
    2 days ago

    The only application I can think of off the top of my head that would require that precision is a R2R DAC.

    Just sort through a bin until you find one.

  • -☂️-@lemmy.ml
    31·
    2 days ago

    best they can usually do is three fiddy, and thats usually enough.

  • A_A@lemmy.world
    2·
    2 days ago

    Quantum Ampere Standard
    https://www.nist.gov/noac/technology/current-and-voltage/quantum-ampere-standard
    .
    there also been research for defining a quantum volt and quantumly stable resistors

    https://www.nist.gov/noac/technology/current-and-voltage
    Quantum-based measurements for voltage and current are moving toward greater miniaturization

    P.S. :
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Hall_effect
    Quantum Hall effect →
    Applications →
    Electrical resistance standards :

    (…) Later, the 2019 revision of the SI fixed exact values of h and e, resulting in an exact
    RK = h/e2 = 25812.80745… Ω.

    (this is precise to at least 10 significant digits)