Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by Tuna-Fish on Friday September 06, 2019 @10:54AM
(#20896179)
Because the numbers cubed are way larger than the numbers that Excel can represent precisely. Excel uses 64-bit IEEE 754 floats for all arithmetic. They can be used to accurately describe integers smaller than 2^53, or ~10^16. The first number cubed is ~-5*10^50, so you are very clearly outside the range where excel is precise.
You should not use Excel to do any serious mathematics, or really anything else where numerical precision is important.
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by colejohnson66 on Friday September 06, 2019 @02:25PM
(#20898313)
Why is it that a program that people use for accounting doesn’t use arbitrary precision arithmetic?
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by jz391 on Friday September 06, 2019 @02:44PM
(#20898540)
Because for accounting the numbers easily fit in the supported range; even the US National Debt (https://www.usdebtclock.org/)...
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by julienchastang on Friday September 06, 2019 @12:05PM
(#20896855)
No need to downvote this comment. It is a legitimate numerical computation question and one that has interesting answers as evidenced by this sub-thread. Not everyone knows about how computers do floating point arithmetic, handles large ints, or otherwise.
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by omaranto on Friday September 06, 2019 @11:06AM
(#20896284)
You need more precision. Try this in your browser console instead, using the new BigInt type in JavaScript:
(-80538738812075974n)**3n + 80435758145817515n**3n + 12602123297335631n**3n
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by conjectures on Friday September 06, 2019 @11:00AM
(#20896239)
Welcome to numerical computing :D!
Btw:
julia> (-80538738812075974)^3 + 80435758145817515^3 + 12602123297335631^3
42
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by wglb on Friday September 06, 2019 @12:16PM
(#20896958)
Or
CL-USER> (+ (expt -80538738812075974 3) (expt 80435758145817515 3) (expt 12602123297335631 3))
42
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by nathanm412 on Friday September 06, 2019 @11:02AM
(#20896249)
Oddly enough, it works for Bing.
https://www.bing.com/search?q=%3D%28-80538738812075974%29%5E...
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by timerol on Friday September 06, 2019 @11:14AM
(#20896358)
Excel is probably coercing them to floating point, instead of using infinite-precision integers. Wolfram-Alpha gets it right: https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%28-80538738812075974%...
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by dagw on Friday September 06, 2019 @10:53AM
(#20896163)
Excel can't to math on arbitrarly large ints, so tuncates all the numbers and gives you the wrong result
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by tejtm on Friday September 06, 2019 @02:19PM
(#20898246)
Sadly `awk/gwak` fails as well returning
198929873392615583518074640613244928
I take that back,
needs the `M` flagawk -M 'END{print (-80538738812075974)^3 + 80435758145817515^3 + 12602123297335631^3}' /dev/null
42
but `bc` of course works
echo '(-80538738812075974)^3 + 80435758145817515^3 + 12602123297335631^3' | bc
42
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by outside1234 on Friday September 06, 2019 @10:52AM
(#20896153)
Integer overflow?
Re:42 is found to be the sum of three cubes
by tempWinHater on Friday September 06, 2019 @11:14AM
(#20896367)
Works in Windows calculator.
=(-80538738812075974)^3 + 80435758145817515^3 + 12602123297335631^3
Returns 1.09785E+36