New scientific calculator

[CreatedEvolution]

This theoretical calculator i named the retilator. This calculator can count by more numbers than 10 before repeating. When you count by numbers up to 360 I believe you get answers with no prime numbers and also forsure no repeating fractions.

Before you bash this idea I spent a lot of time thinking about scientific error. I challenge you to solve equations only repeating by 3 then how about 11-21 etc. I’ve done 3 you can solve pie theoretically. Please put deep thought into this first. I have examples if you need them but the notebook is lost.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Basically I look at 3.14 as a never ending number it should be thrown out

 

[CreatedEvolution]

It is scientific error I was trying to correct

 

[CreatedEvolution]

This old irrational approx value of pie needs to be thrown out. If we are trying to land mass at the moon we should start using equations that do not involve pie. Do rocket ship trajectory use an irrational number?

 

[COLGeek]

So, you propose alternate "bases" rather than out base-10 system. That is hardly novel.

List of numeral systems - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You sure seem to have lots of theories.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

If you count by 360 numbers your diameter would be 114.65 however this is approximately due to 3.14 being irrational it is incorrect. 360x .314 is only 113.04 usually division and multiplication have the same outcome when using decimal form. Our calculator using pie needs to be outdated! Thoughts and inspiration please.

 

[billslugg]

Base does not change value. Numbers on our computer screen are in base 10, but inside the memory they are base 2 and in some places base 16. Everything, no matter what it is, always comes out exactly the same, no matter what base you use. No one cares what base you use.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Would you agree that if you use an odd base now only even numbers will be repeating incorrect answers. I do care about the base. The only answer to 1/3 is 1/3 it will never be .33 repeating just as an answer such as pie will never be correct because it is never ending.

 

[COLGeek]

Would you agree that if you use an odd base now only even numbers will be repeating incorrect answers. I do care about the base. The only answer to 1/3 is 1/3 it will never be .33 repeating just as an answer such as pie will never be correct because it is never ending.

Why do you care? Not all things can be divided equally, if that is your concern.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Not by a 10 base. But a more advanced calculator avoids repeating numbers and decimals outside of computing range. This was a bold attempt to solve 1/3 in fraction form… it is possible without repeating after 10 or using the fraction as a key.

 

[Classical Motion]

Our pi is a ratio. An irrational ratio. Are you trying to find a base where that ratio is no longer irrational? And that would be the base that nature uses?

There is a pi shape and a pi motion. Both are very restrictive and conditional.

pi is a human concept. I doubt one can find pi in nature.

Nature doesn’t use radii and diameters for rotation. Nature only needs a circumference for rotation.

Just one twist in the length of a circumference can shorten the circumference without shorting the length of the circumference.

So with any number of twist, pi no longer exists. The C/D ratio no longer applies. The C/D ratio is always larger than pi. And that ratio is now, adjustable.

Nature’s pi is probably closer to 4. But ratios of 10 or higher is quite possible. Even ratios of 100 and 1000. But probably not known to many. Charge structure.

And just like length, velocity can be sub divided like length, with a twist, and achieve relative velocities and still hold the original velocity. Keeping the constant length and velocity.

Both are examples of quantum rotations. Which are quantum sub sets of c rotations.

No radii or diameter needed.

Just supposition.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Thank you for the insight. Makes the calculator seem kind of useless. I still believe having a higher base number that eliminates prime numbers would lead to more accurate science.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

if you have the prime number 1/3 you can use the bottom number as a base and .1 would now represent 1/3

.1+.1+.1 = 1 I had a lot of fun digging into this theoretical calculator

 

[billslugg]

Except, the prime numbers are among the positive integers plus zero. Fractions cannot be prime.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

I had a typo there. I am certain that using a base that has decimals within calculator range would be a true correct answer because as of now our calculator cannot divide 1/3 I do not accept close enough. My teacher said it’s understood what it represents and all I know is it represents the wrong answer.

 

[COLGeek]

That isn't the only fraction with that issue. Why does this matter so much to you? Seems you have a particular issue that the rest of us can't glean.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

I have always been a do it yourself type of person. I lead by example. I know there’s restrictions on uavs. I have been having fun trying to calculate alternate methods to the moon. I was having a discussion with another member who thinks the population crisis is not related to space.com when I was saying if there’s a nuclear winter it could actually be more cost affordable than land or underground farming. The calculator is so if and if I say I ever get to launch a toy at the moon my calculator will not have computer error where it does not calculate far enough

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Sometimes it takes me awhile to process your answers. I am always hungry for knowledge I think what billslug meant is prime numbers can be played with by adding a zero and doing tenths. Like my .1 theory I thought a lot about

 

[billslugg]

No, what I meant was "every prime must be an integer". No fraction can be a prime number.

 

[BeggarsInSpain]

If you get me an analog computer and text book, I will help you make whatever scientific calculator you want. Will the purposes of this scientific calculator be profitable or are we only in it for the glory?

 

[CreatedEvolution]

We will make profit or people will never back the idea. I suggest replacing scientific calculators or adding a new program key. I would love the help. I have a lot of trouble figuring out all the math processes

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Such as a new way to find the radius or use of pi and long digits I want to eliminate

 

[CreatedEvolution]

My main issue is wanting to use 360 non repeating numbers we will have combined keys or a new math language

 

[BeggarsInSpain]

I want the text book and the computer up front.

 

[CreatedEvolution]

Do u have programming capabilities. I have high hopes. Doing everything on my own is impossible. I can think of something great but I need fellow scientists help to advance. I will buy you your requests in February or march if you prove useful.