Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Mathematics/2013 February 15
Mathematics desk | ||
---|---|---|
< February 14 | << Jan | February | Mar >> | February 16 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Mathematics Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
February 15
[edit]How do you solve for n?
[edit]How do you solve for , given and ? The parameter values of interest are of the order and . Can someone give a good approximation formula that can be evaluated without overflows or gross loss of precision during computation? Thanks. --173.49.13.216 (talk) 03:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not a specialist of this kind of thing, but this can be rewritten (exactly) as
In approximate terms, we can write this as
In linearizing the logarithms, the error in the terms on the left is at most about times their value. Given the approximate value of n, the error on the left is, in proportion, about . In other words, in using the formula you commit an error of at most about times the vaue of n. (In fact, a more careful calculation shows that the error is about 2/3 of this, and that it results in an underestimation of the minimum possible n.) If you replace r - 1 with r, this rises to about 1/r, or 10-9. If you replace with , the error rises to about times the value of n. 64.140.122.50 (talk) 05:58, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- I forgot to mention this - I'm using natural logarithms here. 64.140.122.50 (talk) 06:08, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks. Your formula is more than good enough. --173.49.13.216 (talk) 12:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)