Talk:Metallic ratios: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
Thundergnat (talk | contribs) (→Please don't add unnecessarily large outputs: new section) |
m (→Please don't add unnecessarily large outputs: added comments.) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
If you want to demonstrate calculating the ratio to insane precision past 256 decimal places, fine, but please just put how many iterations it took, not the calculated value. It doesn't really add anything. If you ''really'' want to see extremely precisely calculated values for phi, [https://oeis.org/A001622/a001622.txt here's it is to one million places]. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 18:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC) |
If you want to demonstrate calculating the ratio to insane precision past 256 decimal places, fine, but please just put how many iterations it took, not the calculated value. It doesn't really add anything. If you ''really'' want to see extremely precisely calculated values for phi, [https://oeis.org/A001622/a001622.txt here's it is to one million places]. --[[User:Thundergnat|Thundergnat]] ([[User talk:Thundergnat|talk]]) 18:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC) |
||
: Why is it that you call my 10,000 decimal digit example (REXX) an insane precision, but 1,000,000 was extremely precise? In any case, it has been deleted. But, my reason wasn't to see extremely precisely calculated values of phi. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:30, 2 November 2019 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 01:31, 2 November 2019
Please don't add unnecessarily large outputs
If you want to demonstrate calculating the ratio to insane precision past 256 decimal places, fine, but please just put how many iterations it took, not the calculated value. It doesn't really add anything. If you really want to see extremely precisely calculated values for phi, here's it is to one million places. --Thundergnat (talk) 18:19, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
- Why is it that you call my 10,000 decimal digit example (REXX) an insane precision, but 1,000,000 was extremely precise? In any case, it has been deleted. But, my reason wasn't to see extremely precisely calculated values of phi. -- Gerard Schildberger (talk) 01:30, 2 November 2019 (UTC)