Approximating irrational number to rational number$lim_ntoinfty f(2^n)$ for some very slowly increasing function $f(n)$Hermite Interpolation of $e^x$. Strange behaviour when increasing the number of derivatives at interpolating points.Newton's Method, and approximating parameters for Bézier curves.Approximating Logs and Antilogs by handApproximating fractionsExistence of Irrational Number that has same $n$ digits of a given Rational Number.Finding Irrational Approximation for a given Rational Number.Atomic weights: rational or irrational?Does there exist infinitely many $mu$ which satisfy this:Approximating functions with rational functions

Did arcade monitors have same pixel aspect ratio as TV sets?

why `nmap 192.168.1.97` returns less services than `nmap 127.0.0.1`?

How to explain what's wrong with this application of the chain rule?

Create all possible words using a set or letters

If infinitesimal transformations commute why dont the generators of the Lorentz group commute?

Biological Blimps: Propulsion

Removing files under particular conditions (number of files, file age)

Redundant comparison & "if" before assignment

What is Cash Advance APR?

250 Floor Tower

What should you do if you miss a job interview (deliberately)?

Intuition of generalized eigenvector.

Why is so much work done on numerical verification of the Riemann Hypothesis?

How to bake one texture for one mesh with multiple textures blender 2.8

What was this official D&D 3.5e Lovecraft-flavored rulebook?

It grows, but water kills it

C++ debug/print custom type with GDB : the case of nlohmann json library

The screen of my macbook suddenly broken down how can I do to recover

How can Trident be so inexpensive? Will it orbit Triton or just do a (slow) flyby?

Can I sign legal documents with a smiley face?

Are the IPv6 address space and IPv4 address space completely disjoint?

What does routing an IP address mean?

Closed-form expression for certain product

How to implement a feedback to keep the DC gain at zero for this conceptual passive filter?



Approximating irrational number to rational number


$lim_ntoinfty f(2^n)$ for some very slowly increasing function $f(n)$Hermite Interpolation of $e^x$. Strange behaviour when increasing the number of derivatives at interpolating points.Newton's Method, and approximating parameters for Bézier curves.Approximating Logs and Antilogs by handApproximating fractionsExistence of Irrational Number that has same $n$ digits of a given Rational Number.Finding Irrational Approximation for a given Rational Number.Atomic weights: rational or irrational?Does there exist infinitely many $mu$ which satisfy this:Approximating functions with rational functions













3












$begingroup$


I'm making a phone game, and I need to approximate $frac log(5/4)log(3/2)$ to a rational number $p/q$.

I wish $p$ and $q$ small enough. For example, I don't want $p$, $qapprox 10^7$; it's way too much for my code.



In the game, there's two way to upgrade ability. Type A gives additional $50%$ increase at once. and type B gives $25%$.

What I want to know is how many times of upgrade $(x,y)$ provides same additional increase. So what I've done is solve $(3/2)^x = (5/4)^y$ respect to $frac xy$.



Can you provide me way to construct sequence $p_n$, $q_n$ which approximate the real number?

Thank you in advance.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
    $endgroup$
    – amsmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    try 82/149 ........
    $endgroup$
    – Will Jagy
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago















3












$begingroup$


I'm making a phone game, and I need to approximate $frac log(5/4)log(3/2)$ to a rational number $p/q$.

I wish $p$ and $q$ small enough. For example, I don't want $p$, $qapprox 10^7$; it's way too much for my code.



In the game, there's two way to upgrade ability. Type A gives additional $50%$ increase at once. and type B gives $25%$.

What I want to know is how many times of upgrade $(x,y)$ provides same additional increase. So what I've done is solve $(3/2)^x = (5/4)^y$ respect to $frac xy$.



Can you provide me way to construct sequence $p_n$, $q_n$ which approximate the real number?

Thank you in advance.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
    $endgroup$
    – amsmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    try 82/149 ........
    $endgroup$
    – Will Jagy
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago













3












3








3





$begingroup$


I'm making a phone game, and I need to approximate $frac log(5/4)log(3/2)$ to a rational number $p/q$.

I wish $p$ and $q$ small enough. For example, I don't want $p$, $qapprox 10^7$; it's way too much for my code.



In the game, there's two way to upgrade ability. Type A gives additional $50%$ increase at once. and type B gives $25%$.

What I want to know is how many times of upgrade $(x,y)$ provides same additional increase. So what I've done is solve $(3/2)^x = (5/4)^y$ respect to $frac xy$.



Can you provide me way to construct sequence $p_n$, $q_n$ which approximate the real number?

Thank you in advance.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I'm making a phone game, and I need to approximate $frac log(5/4)log(3/2)$ to a rational number $p/q$.

I wish $p$ and $q$ small enough. For example, I don't want $p$, $qapprox 10^7$; it's way too much for my code.



In the game, there's two way to upgrade ability. Type A gives additional $50%$ increase at once. and type B gives $25%$.

What I want to know is how many times of upgrade $(x,y)$ provides same additional increase. So what I've done is solve $(3/2)^x = (5/4)^y$ respect to $frac xy$.



Can you provide me way to construct sequence $p_n$, $q_n$ which approximate the real number?

Thank you in advance.







approximation






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Rócherz

2,9863821




2,9863821










asked 2 hours ago









MrTanorusMrTanorus

1928




1928











  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
    $endgroup$
    – amsmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    try 82/149 ........
    $endgroup$
    – Will Jagy
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago
















  • $begingroup$
    I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
    $endgroup$
    – amsmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
    $endgroup$
    – hardmath
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
    $endgroup$
    – user647486
    1 hour ago











  • $begingroup$
    try 82/149 ........
    $endgroup$
    – Will Jagy
    1 hour ago










  • $begingroup$
    Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Minus One-Twelfth
    1 hour ago















$begingroup$
I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
$endgroup$
– amsmath
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
I don't understand your game, but your number approximately $0.55034$ and thus $tfrac55034100000$ or $tfrac550310000$. What's wrong with that?
$endgroup$
– amsmath
1 hour ago




1




1




$begingroup$
The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
The continued fraction expansion of your irrational number will produce the best rational approximation subject to a limit on size of the denominator.
$endgroup$
– hardmath
1 hour ago




1




1




$begingroup$
You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
$endgroup$
– user647486
1 hour ago





$begingroup$
You can take truncations of the continued fraction of that number. The first few of its values start like this.
$endgroup$
– user647486
1 hour ago













$begingroup$
try 82/149 ........
$endgroup$
– Will Jagy
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
try 82/149 ........
$endgroup$
– Will Jagy
1 hour ago












$begingroup$
Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
$endgroup$
– Minus One-Twelfth
1 hour ago




$begingroup$
Cool, a practical application of continued fractions. :)
$endgroup$
– Minus One-Twelfth
1 hour ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















3












$begingroup$

The continued fraction for $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$ is
$$
0;1,1,4,2,6,1,color#C0010,143,3,dots
$$

The convergents for this continued fraction are
$$
left0,1,frac12,frac59,frac1120,frac71129,frac82149,color#C00frac8911619,frac127495231666,frac383376696617,dotsright
$$

As Ross Millikan mentions, stopping just before a large continuant like $143$ gives a particularly good approximation for the size of the denominator; in this case, the approximation $frac8911619$ is closer than $frac1143cdot1619^2$ to $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    1 hour ago


















2












$begingroup$

The number you want to approximate is about $0.550339713213$. An excellent approximation is $frac 8911619approx 0.550339715873$. I got that by using the continued fraction. When you see a large value like $143$, truncating before it yields a very good approximation.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn♦
    58 mins ago



















1












$begingroup$

Running the extended Euclidean algorithm to find the continued fraction:



$$beginarrayccx&q&a&b\
hline 0.55033971 & & 0 & 1\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 0\ 0.55033971 & 1 & 0 & 1\ 0.44966029 & 1 & 1 & -1 \ 0.10067943 & 4 & -1 & 2\ 0.04694258 & 2 & 5 & -9\ 0.00679426 & 6 & -11 & 20 \ 0.00617700 & 1 & 71 & -129 \ 0.00061727 & 10 & -82 & 149\ 4.31cdot 10^-6 & 143 & 891 & -1619 \
1.25cdot 10^-6 & 3 & -127495 & 231666endarray$$

The $q$ column are the quotients, that go into the continued fraction. The $a$ and $b$ columns track a linear combination of the original two that's equal to $x_n$; for example, $-11cdot 1 + 20cdot fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)approx 0.00679426$. The fraction $left|fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)right|$ is approximated by $frac$, with increasing accuracy.



The formulas for building this table: $q_n = leftlfloor frac x_n-1x_nrightrfloor$, $x_n+1=x_n-1-q_nx_n$, $a_n+1=a_n-1-q_na_n$, $b_n+1=b_n-1-q_nb_n$. Initialize with $x_0=1$, $x_-1$ the quantity we're trying to estimate, $a_-1=b_0=0$, $a_0=b_-1=1$.

If you run the table much large than this, watch for floating-point accuracy issues; once the $x_n$ get down close to the accuracy limit for floating point numbers near zero, you can't trust the quotients anymore.



Now, how that accuracy increases is irregular. Large quotients go with particularly good approximations - see how that quotient of $143$ means that we have to go to six-digit numerator and denominator to do better than that $frac8911619$ approximation.



It is of course a tradeoff between accuracy and how deep you go. For your purposes in costing the two upgrades, I'd probably go with that $frac1120$ approximation.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160023%2fapproximating-irrational-number-to-rational-number%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    3












    $begingroup$

    The continued fraction for $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$ is
    $$
    0;1,1,4,2,6,1,color#C0010,143,3,dots
    $$

    The convergents for this continued fraction are
    $$
    left0,1,frac12,frac59,frac1120,frac71129,frac82149,color#C00frac8911619,frac127495231666,frac383376696617,dotsright
    $$

    As Ross Millikan mentions, stopping just before a large continuant like $143$ gives a particularly good approximation for the size of the denominator; in this case, the approximation $frac8911619$ is closer than $frac1143cdot1619^2$ to $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Ross Millikan
      1 hour ago















    3












    $begingroup$

    The continued fraction for $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$ is
    $$
    0;1,1,4,2,6,1,color#C0010,143,3,dots
    $$

    The convergents for this continued fraction are
    $$
    left0,1,frac12,frac59,frac1120,frac71129,frac82149,color#C00frac8911619,frac127495231666,frac383376696617,dotsright
    $$

    As Ross Millikan mentions, stopping just before a large continuant like $143$ gives a particularly good approximation for the size of the denominator; in this case, the approximation $frac8911619$ is closer than $frac1143cdot1619^2$ to $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Ross Millikan
      1 hour ago













    3












    3








    3





    $begingroup$

    The continued fraction for $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$ is
    $$
    0;1,1,4,2,6,1,color#C0010,143,3,dots
    $$

    The convergents for this continued fraction are
    $$
    left0,1,frac12,frac59,frac1120,frac71129,frac82149,color#C00frac8911619,frac127495231666,frac383376696617,dotsright
    $$

    As Ross Millikan mentions, stopping just before a large continuant like $143$ gives a particularly good approximation for the size of the denominator; in this case, the approximation $frac8911619$ is closer than $frac1143cdot1619^2$ to $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    The continued fraction for $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$ is
    $$
    0;1,1,4,2,6,1,color#C0010,143,3,dots
    $$

    The convergents for this continued fraction are
    $$
    left0,1,frac12,frac59,frac1120,frac71129,frac82149,color#C00frac8911619,frac127495231666,frac383376696617,dotsright
    $$

    As Ross Millikan mentions, stopping just before a large continuant like $143$ gives a particularly good approximation for the size of the denominator; in this case, the approximation $frac8911619$ is closer than $frac1143cdot1619^2$ to $fraclogleft(frac54right)logleft(frac32right)$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 1 hour ago









    robjohn♦robjohn

    269k27311638




    269k27311638











    • $begingroup$
      Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Ross Millikan
      1 hour ago
















    • $begingroup$
      Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
      $endgroup$
      – Ross Millikan
      1 hour ago















    $begingroup$
    Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    1 hour ago




    $begingroup$
    Thank you. A good addition to my answer.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    1 hour ago











    2












    $begingroup$

    The number you want to approximate is about $0.550339713213$. An excellent approximation is $frac 8911619approx 0.550339715873$. I got that by using the continued fraction. When you see a large value like $143$, truncating before it yields a very good approximation.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
      $endgroup$
      – robjohn♦
      58 mins ago
















    2












    $begingroup$

    The number you want to approximate is about $0.550339713213$. An excellent approximation is $frac 8911619approx 0.550339715873$. I got that by using the continued fraction. When you see a large value like $143$, truncating before it yields a very good approximation.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
      $endgroup$
      – robjohn♦
      58 mins ago














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    The number you want to approximate is about $0.550339713213$. An excellent approximation is $frac 8911619approx 0.550339715873$. I got that by using the continued fraction. When you see a large value like $143$, truncating before it yields a very good approximation.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    The number you want to approximate is about $0.550339713213$. An excellent approximation is $frac 8911619approx 0.550339715873$. I got that by using the continued fraction. When you see a large value like $143$, truncating before it yields a very good approximation.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 1 hour ago









    Ross MillikanRoss Millikan

    300k24200374




    300k24200374











    • $begingroup$
      (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
      $endgroup$
      – robjohn♦
      58 mins ago

















    • $begingroup$
      (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
      $endgroup$
      – robjohn♦
      58 mins ago
















    $begingroup$
    (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn♦
    58 mins ago





    $begingroup$
    (+1) I wondered where you got $143$ until I actually computed the continued fraction. I'd hoped it was okay to expand upon your answer to show where that number came from. Also to mention that if $frac pq$ is a continued fraction approximation and $c$ is the next term in the conitnued fraction (which I think is called a continuant), then $frac pq$ is closer than $frac1cq^2$ to the value approximated.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn♦
    58 mins ago












    1












    $begingroup$

    Running the extended Euclidean algorithm to find the continued fraction:



    $$beginarrayccx&q&a&b\
    hline 0.55033971 & & 0 & 1\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 0\ 0.55033971 & 1 & 0 & 1\ 0.44966029 & 1 & 1 & -1 \ 0.10067943 & 4 & -1 & 2\ 0.04694258 & 2 & 5 & -9\ 0.00679426 & 6 & -11 & 20 \ 0.00617700 & 1 & 71 & -129 \ 0.00061727 & 10 & -82 & 149\ 4.31cdot 10^-6 & 143 & 891 & -1619 \
    1.25cdot 10^-6 & 3 & -127495 & 231666endarray$$

    The $q$ column are the quotients, that go into the continued fraction. The $a$ and $b$ columns track a linear combination of the original two that's equal to $x_n$; for example, $-11cdot 1 + 20cdot fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)approx 0.00679426$. The fraction $left|fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)right|$ is approximated by $frac$, with increasing accuracy.



    The formulas for building this table: $q_n = leftlfloor frac x_n-1x_nrightrfloor$, $x_n+1=x_n-1-q_nx_n$, $a_n+1=a_n-1-q_na_n$, $b_n+1=b_n-1-q_nb_n$. Initialize with $x_0=1$, $x_-1$ the quantity we're trying to estimate, $a_-1=b_0=0$, $a_0=b_-1=1$.

    If you run the table much large than this, watch for floating-point accuracy issues; once the $x_n$ get down close to the accuracy limit for floating point numbers near zero, you can't trust the quotients anymore.



    Now, how that accuracy increases is irregular. Large quotients go with particularly good approximations - see how that quotient of $143$ means that we have to go to six-digit numerator and denominator to do better than that $frac8911619$ approximation.



    It is of course a tradeoff between accuracy and how deep you go. For your purposes in costing the two upgrades, I'd probably go with that $frac1120$ approximation.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      1












      $begingroup$

      Running the extended Euclidean algorithm to find the continued fraction:



      $$beginarrayccx&q&a&b\
      hline 0.55033971 & & 0 & 1\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 0\ 0.55033971 & 1 & 0 & 1\ 0.44966029 & 1 & 1 & -1 \ 0.10067943 & 4 & -1 & 2\ 0.04694258 & 2 & 5 & -9\ 0.00679426 & 6 & -11 & 20 \ 0.00617700 & 1 & 71 & -129 \ 0.00061727 & 10 & -82 & 149\ 4.31cdot 10^-6 & 143 & 891 & -1619 \
      1.25cdot 10^-6 & 3 & -127495 & 231666endarray$$

      The $q$ column are the quotients, that go into the continued fraction. The $a$ and $b$ columns track a linear combination of the original two that's equal to $x_n$; for example, $-11cdot 1 + 20cdot fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)approx 0.00679426$. The fraction $left|fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)right|$ is approximated by $frac$, with increasing accuracy.



      The formulas for building this table: $q_n = leftlfloor frac x_n-1x_nrightrfloor$, $x_n+1=x_n-1-q_nx_n$, $a_n+1=a_n-1-q_na_n$, $b_n+1=b_n-1-q_nb_n$. Initialize with $x_0=1$, $x_-1$ the quantity we're trying to estimate, $a_-1=b_0=0$, $a_0=b_-1=1$.

      If you run the table much large than this, watch for floating-point accuracy issues; once the $x_n$ get down close to the accuracy limit for floating point numbers near zero, you can't trust the quotients anymore.



      Now, how that accuracy increases is irregular. Large quotients go with particularly good approximations - see how that quotient of $143$ means that we have to go to six-digit numerator and denominator to do better than that $frac8911619$ approximation.



      It is of course a tradeoff between accuracy and how deep you go. For your purposes in costing the two upgrades, I'd probably go with that $frac1120$ approximation.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Running the extended Euclidean algorithm to find the continued fraction:



        $$beginarrayccx&q&a&b\
        hline 0.55033971 & & 0 & 1\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 0\ 0.55033971 & 1 & 0 & 1\ 0.44966029 & 1 & 1 & -1 \ 0.10067943 & 4 & -1 & 2\ 0.04694258 & 2 & 5 & -9\ 0.00679426 & 6 & -11 & 20 \ 0.00617700 & 1 & 71 & -129 \ 0.00061727 & 10 & -82 & 149\ 4.31cdot 10^-6 & 143 & 891 & -1619 \
        1.25cdot 10^-6 & 3 & -127495 & 231666endarray$$

        The $q$ column are the quotients, that go into the continued fraction. The $a$ and $b$ columns track a linear combination of the original two that's equal to $x_n$; for example, $-11cdot 1 + 20cdot fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)approx 0.00679426$. The fraction $left|fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)right|$ is approximated by $frac$, with increasing accuracy.



        The formulas for building this table: $q_n = leftlfloor frac x_n-1x_nrightrfloor$, $x_n+1=x_n-1-q_nx_n$, $a_n+1=a_n-1-q_na_n$, $b_n+1=b_n-1-q_nb_n$. Initialize with $x_0=1$, $x_-1$ the quantity we're trying to estimate, $a_-1=b_0=0$, $a_0=b_-1=1$.

        If you run the table much large than this, watch for floating-point accuracy issues; once the $x_n$ get down close to the accuracy limit for floating point numbers near zero, you can't trust the quotients anymore.



        Now, how that accuracy increases is irregular. Large quotients go with particularly good approximations - see how that quotient of $143$ means that we have to go to six-digit numerator and denominator to do better than that $frac8911619$ approximation.



        It is of course a tradeoff between accuracy and how deep you go. For your purposes in costing the two upgrades, I'd probably go with that $frac1120$ approximation.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Running the extended Euclidean algorithm to find the continued fraction:



        $$beginarrayccx&q&a&b\
        hline 0.55033971 & & 0 & 1\ 1 & 0 & 1 & 0\ 0.55033971 & 1 & 0 & 1\ 0.44966029 & 1 & 1 & -1 \ 0.10067943 & 4 & -1 & 2\ 0.04694258 & 2 & 5 & -9\ 0.00679426 & 6 & -11 & 20 \ 0.00617700 & 1 & 71 & -129 \ 0.00061727 & 10 & -82 & 149\ 4.31cdot 10^-6 & 143 & 891 & -1619 \
        1.25cdot 10^-6 & 3 & -127495 & 231666endarray$$

        The $q$ column are the quotients, that go into the continued fraction. The $a$ and $b$ columns track a linear combination of the original two that's equal to $x_n$; for example, $-11cdot 1 + 20cdot fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)approx 0.00679426$. The fraction $left|fraclog(5/4)log(3/2)right|$ is approximated by $frac$, with increasing accuracy.



        The formulas for building this table: $q_n = leftlfloor frac x_n-1x_nrightrfloor$, $x_n+1=x_n-1-q_nx_n$, $a_n+1=a_n-1-q_na_n$, $b_n+1=b_n-1-q_nb_n$. Initialize with $x_0=1$, $x_-1$ the quantity we're trying to estimate, $a_-1=b_0=0$, $a_0=b_-1=1$.

        If you run the table much large than this, watch for floating-point accuracy issues; once the $x_n$ get down close to the accuracy limit for floating point numbers near zero, you can't trust the quotients anymore.



        Now, how that accuracy increases is irregular. Large quotients go with particularly good approximations - see how that quotient of $143$ means that we have to go to six-digit numerator and denominator to do better than that $frac8911619$ approximation.



        It is of course a tradeoff between accuracy and how deep you go. For your purposes in costing the two upgrades, I'd probably go with that $frac1120$ approximation.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 1 hour ago









        jmerryjmerry

        15.8k1632




        15.8k1632



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid …


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160023%2fapproximating-irrational-number-to-rational-number%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Which organization defines CJK Unified Ideographs? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowCharacters which have several different shapesHow useful are the kanji in reading Chinese?Can Chinese readers scan large amounts of text faster/more accurately than their alphabet-using counterparts?丼: why is “well” also “bowl of food”?What Does Unicode 8.0 Mean For Chinese?How are blanks indicated for placeholders in Chinese (like ???)Is there a dictionary of standard character variants?How to display CJK Extension F?How is it decided as to which character is used on the tech terminology?How does 子 come to mean 'midnight'?

            Shenzhen Football Club Índice Elenco atual | Títulos | Referências Ligações externas | Menu de navegaçãoGooglenotíciaslivrosacadêmicoeditar«"Elenco"»Site oficialexpandindo-oeee

            When We Were Young (canção de Adele) Índice Antecedentes e lançamento | Faixas e formatos | Performances e covers | Desempenho nas tabelas musicais | Créditos | Histórico de lançamento | Referências Menu de navegação«Best albums of 2015»«Adele - When We Were Young (Radio Date: 22-01-2016)»«When We Were Young - Single by Adele»«Adele: Inside Her Private Life and Triumphant Return»«adele interview: world exclusive first interview in three years»«Tobias Jesso Jr: since Adele tweeted his song, he's even bigger than his dad»«Adele interviews Tobias Jesso Jr: 'I think that a couple of the ideas we had could be rap songs'»«Adele on Her Return: 'I Was So Frightened That No One Cared'»«Tobias Jesso Jr. on working with Adele: 'I was as nervous as shit'»«How Ariel Rechtshaid Pushed Adele To Her Limit»«Adele Previews 'When We Were Young' on '60 Minutes' Teaser, Tops Trending 140»«Adele Performs New '25' Ballad, "When We Were Young" Live: Watch»«Which '25' Song Should Be Adele's Next Single?»«Adele's 'When We Were Young' Confirmed As Second Single From '25'»«Adele's new single artwork for 'When We Were Young' is perfectly adorable»«Adele at the BBC review: honest, funny and spectacular – Celebrity News News»«'Saturday Night Live': Adele Sings 'Hello' and 'When We Were Young'»«'Adele: Live in New York City' NBC Special – Set List Revealed!»«Adele Closes Out the 2016 Brit Awards With 'When We Were Young'»«What Is The Adele Live Tour Set List? There's No Way She'd Leave Out These 8 Songs»«See Demi Lovato's Soaring Cover of Adele's 'When We Were Young'»«'The Voice': 5 Best Moments From Week 1 Blind Auditions»«Adele – When We Were Young (Media Control Charts)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Entertainment Monitoring Africa)»«Adele – When We Were Young (ARIA Charts)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Ö3 Austria Top 40)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Ultratop 50)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Ultratop 40)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Canadian Hot 100)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Tracklisten)»«Adele – When We Were Young (The Official Charts Company)»«Adele – Hello (IFPI Slovenská Republika)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Productores de Música de España)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Billboard Hot 100)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Pop Songs)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Adult Pop Songs)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Hot Adult Contemporary Charts)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Hot Dance Club Songs)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Rock Airplay)»«Adele – When We Were Young (IFPI Finlândia)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Syndicat National de l'Éditon Phonographique)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Magyar Hanglemezkiadók Szövetsége)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Irish Recorded Music Association)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Mexico Airplay)»«Adele – When We Were Young (VG-lista)»«Adele – When We Were Young (NZ Top 40 Singles)»«Adele – When We Were Young (MegaCharts)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Związek Producentów Audio Video)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Portugal Digital Songs)»«Adele – When We Were Young (UK Indie Singles Chart)»«Adele – When We Were Young (UK Singles Chart)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Sverigetopplistan)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Schweizer Hitparade)»«Adele – When We Were Young (Portugal Digital Songs)»«Music Canada – Gold/Platinum – When We Were Young»«NZ Top 40 Singles Chart»«Certified Awards»e