30,366
edits
Tiddlywinks (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 128: | Line 128: | ||
~~shinyrex | ~~shinyrex | ||
::That's not the point. The point is that somebody edited the article, said that he/she took that possibility into account but really didn't, and I'm here to make sure that the first part of the sentence is true before I change it back. Neither equation is necessarily MY equation. [[User:Sumwun|sumwun]] ([[User talk:Sumwun|talk]]) 00:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC) | ::That's not the point. The point is that somebody edited the article, said that he/she took that possibility into account but really didn't, and I'm here to make sure that the first part of the sentence is true before I change it back. Neither equation is necessarily MY equation. [[User:Sumwun|sumwun]] ([[User talk:Sumwun|talk]]) 00:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::As near as I can tell, the value of <code>1/10870</code> is, relatively speaking, nowhere ''near'' the value of <code>1-(65535/65536)^6</code>, and I don't have the first idea why you think <code>1-(65535/65536)^6</code> reduces to <code>1/10870</code> unless you've completely assumed that. ''As near as I can tell'', relatively speaking, the value <code>1/10923</code> is approximately equal to ''both'' <code>1-(65535/65536)^6</code> and <code>6/65536</code>—at the very least, they're all much closer to equal to each other than <code>1/10870</code> is to any of them. [[User:Tiddlywinks|Tiddlywinks]] ([[User talk:Tiddlywinks|talk]]) 01:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC) |