Vjylku

A link redirect to http instead of https: how critical is it?

Have researchers managed to "reverse time"? If so, what does that mean for physics?

Are there verbs that are neither telic, or atelic?

Why do Australian milk farmers need to protest supermarkets' milk price?

Should we release the security issues we found in our product as CVE or we can just update those on weekly release notes?

How to terminate ping <dest> &

How to write cleanly even if my character uses expletive language?

Why doesn't the EU now just force the UK to choose between referendum and no-deal?

Instead of Universal Basic Income, why not Universal Basic NEEDS?

Are ETF trackers fundamentally better than individual stocks?

Gravity magic - How does it work?

What is the significance behind "40 days" that often appears in the Bible?

How to make healing in an exploration game interesting

Unexpected result from ArcLength

What are substitutions for coconut in curry?

Welcoming 2019 Pi day: How to draw the letter π?

Can I use USB data pins as power source

Life insurance that covers only simultaneous/dual deaths

Does Mathematica reuse previous computations?

Is it normal that my co-workers at a fitness company criticize my food choices?

Science-fiction short story where space navy wanted hospital ships and settlers had guns mounted everywhere

Why does Bach not break the rules here?

If curse and magic is two sides of the same coin, why the former is forbidden?

Min function accepting varying number of arguments in C++17

Unexpected result from ArcLength

Determining which rule NIntegrate selects automaticallyFinding minimum fly-by radius between Mars and spacecraft from interpolating functionCoarse-graining in numerical integrationsNIntegrate fails to converge around a value out of integration rangeA 1D numerical integral Mathematica cannot compute, from physicsDifferential Equation with Numerically Integrated Boundary ConditionsDifferents results of the intersection area between two regions when using the function “Area” and the function “NIntegrate”Issue with boundary Integration of FEM numerical solution (interpolation function)How to get the most accurate volume of a special solid?Numerical solution of 3 dim integral with singularity

2

$begingroup$

I want to determine the arc lenght of a parametric curve $C: {x(t),y(t) } = { cos(t)^p , sin(t)^p }$ with $p$ between $0$ and $1$, and $t$ between $0$ and $pi/2$.

I set up the following function of $p$:

L[p_] :=  ArcLength[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, 

                       Method -> {"NIntegrate", MaxRecursion -> 20}]

For $p=1$ we have a quarter of a circle of radius 1 and we know the arc length is equal to $pi/2$. The above function gives the correct result: 1.5708.

For $p$ close to zero, the curve approaches a square, and we know the result should be very close to $2$. However, the function doesn't even come close to it. Evaluating L[1/100] results in 1.30603. Not close to 2 (it's not even bigger than Pi/2).

Plotting, results in the following:

Plot[L[p], {p, 0, 1}]

Any ideas? I'm running 11.0.0.0

numerical-integration

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I get a warning from NIntegrate ("Numerical integration converging too slowly; suspect one of the following: singularity...") when trying to evaluate L for small p.
  $endgroup$
  – MarcoB
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @MarcoB I don't get any warnings when evaluating L[1/100]
  $endgroup$
  – Ivan
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

I want to determine the arc lenght of a parametric curve $C: {x(t),y(t) } = { cos(t)^p , sin(t)^p }$ with $p$ between $0$ and $1$, and $t$ between $0$ and $pi/2$.

I set up the following function of $p$:

L[p_] :=  ArcLength[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, 

                       Method -> {"NIntegrate", MaxRecursion -> 20}]

For $p=1$ we have a quarter of a circle of radius 1 and we know the arc length is equal to $pi/2$. The above function gives the correct result: 1.5708.

For $p$ close to zero, the curve approaches a square, and we know the result should be very close to $2$. However, the function doesn't even come close to it. Evaluating L[1/100] results in 1.30603. Not close to 2 (it's not even bigger than Pi/2).

Plotting, results in the following:

Plot[L[p], {p, 0, 1}]

Any ideas? I'm running 11.0.0.0

numerical-integration

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  I get a warning from NIntegrate ("Numerical integration converging too slowly; suspect one of the following: singularity...") when trying to evaluate L for small p.
  $endgroup$
  – MarcoB
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @MarcoB I don't get any warnings when evaluating L[1/100]
  $endgroup$
  – Ivan
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I want to determine the arc lenght of a parametric curve $C: {x(t),y(t) } = { cos(t)^p , sin(t)^p }$ with $p$ between $0$ and $1$, and $t$ between $0$ and $pi/2$.

I set up the following function of $p$:

L[p_] :=  ArcLength[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, 

                       Method -> {"NIntegrate", MaxRecursion -> 20}]

For $p=1$ we have a quarter of a circle of radius 1 and we know the arc length is equal to $pi/2$. The above function gives the correct result: 1.5708.

For $p$ close to zero, the curve approaches a square, and we know the result should be very close to $2$. However, the function doesn't even come close to it. Evaluating L[1/100] results in 1.30603. Not close to 2 (it's not even bigger than Pi/2).

Plotting, results in the following:

Plot[L[p], {p, 0, 1}]

Any ideas? I'm running 11.0.0.0

numerical-integration

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

$endgroup$

L[p_] :=  ArcLength[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, 

                       Method -> {"NIntegrate", MaxRecursion -> 20}]

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

share|improve this question

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

edited 46 mins ago

Henrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

asked 1 hour ago

IvanIvan

1,612821

3 Answers
3

active

oldest

votes

2

$begingroup$

Manipulate[ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}], {p, 0.01, 1}]

gives this plot at $p=0.01$:

(An unpreprocessing plot was here.)

Yes, looks to be approaching two sides of a square, but the sides are shrinking!

UPDATE:

p = 0.01; ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{0, 1.1}, {0, 1.1}}]

So yes, the sides are not shrinking, but Mathematica seems to be missing some of the curve ...

share|improve this answer

edited 59 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  >but the sides are shrinking. Not really. Check your plotrange
  $endgroup$
  – Ivan
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Yes, but this does not seem to answer the OP's question. Try including smaller values of $p$.
  $endgroup$
  – MarcoB
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  No, not that desperate ... By the way, you guys are tough! Imagine a classroom where a student gives an answer/suggestion that is not correct. Or a collaboration with somebody making a mistake. Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks. May hurt creativity ... But we will have strictly precise, quality answers!!
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @mjw "Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks." To the contrary. I was really surprise that posts in this threads were downvoted so quickly. Downvotes on answers are actually very uncommon on this site.
  $endgroup$
  – Henrik Schumacher
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Ivan, yes, point well taken! Could be an artifact. But why is the ArcLength[] returning wrong results? Seems that in both cases Mathematica is undersampling ...
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  45 mins ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 9 more comments

2

$begingroup$

I can only provide an alternative to bypass ArcLength.

The points pts of a quarter circle are scaled such that they lie on the desired curve; afterwards the length of the polygonal line is computed. You will still get problems for values of p very close to 0, but at least you may obtain a qualitatively correct plot (so I hope).

Certainly this method won't provide you with the best possible accuracy. The relative error between the arclength $ell$ of an arc and the length $s$ of a secant is roughly $|ell/s - 1| leq ell^2 , max(|kappa|)$ in the limit of $ell to 0$. Since the maximal curvature in of curve goes to $infty$ for $p to infty$, the quality of this approximation will reduce significantly for $p to 0$.

n = 10000;

pts = Transpose[{Cos[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]], Sin[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]]}];

L[p_] := With[{x = pts/Power[Dot[(Abs[pts]^(1/p)), {1., 1.}], p]},

  Total[Sqrt[Dot[Differences[x]^2, {1., 1.}]]]

  ]

Plot[L[p], {p, 0.001, 1}]

share|improve this answer

edited 50 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

Seems to be a precision thing.

L[p_] = {Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}



ArcLength[L[1/100], {t, 0, π/2}, WorkingPrecision -> 1000]



1.99447959240474567...

share|improve this answer

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

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: "387"
};
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: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
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
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});

draft saved

draft discarded

Sign up or log in

StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});

Sign up using Google

Sign up using Facebook

Sign up using Email and Password

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f193346%2funexpected-result-from-arclength%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest

Name

Email

Required, but never shown

2

$begingroup$

Manipulate[ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}], {p, 0.01, 1}]

gives this plot at $p=0.01$:

(An unpreprocessing plot was here.)

Yes, looks to be approaching two sides of a square, but the sides are shrinking!

UPDATE:

p = 0.01; ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{0, 1.1}, {0, 1.1}}]

So yes, the sides are not shrinking, but Mathematica seems to be missing some of the curve ...

share|improve this answer

edited 59 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  >but the sides are shrinking. Not really. Check your plotrange
  $endgroup$
  – Ivan
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Yes, but this does not seem to answer the OP's question. Try including smaller values of $p$.
  $endgroup$
  – MarcoB
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  No, not that desperate ... By the way, you guys are tough! Imagine a classroom where a student gives an answer/suggestion that is not correct. Or a collaboration with somebody making a mistake. Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks. May hurt creativity ... But we will have strictly precise, quality answers!!
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @mjw "Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks." To the contrary. I was really surprise that posts in this threads were downvoted so quickly. Downvotes on answers are actually very uncommon on this site.
  $endgroup$
  – Henrik Schumacher
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Ivan, yes, point well taken! Could be an artifact. But why is the ArcLength[] returning wrong results? Seems that in both cases Mathematica is undersampling ...
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  45 mins ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 9 more comments

2

$begingroup$

Manipulate[ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}], {p, 0.01, 1}]

gives this plot at $p=0.01$:

(An unpreprocessing plot was here.)

Yes, looks to be approaching two sides of a square, but the sides are shrinking!

UPDATE:

p = 0.01; ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{0, 1.1}, {0, 1.1}}]

So yes, the sides are not shrinking, but Mathematica seems to be missing some of the curve ...

share|improve this answer

edited 59 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

$endgroup$

• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  >but the sides are shrinking. Not really. Check your plotrange
  $endgroup$
  – Ivan
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  Yes, but this does not seem to answer the OP's question. Try including smaller values of $p$.
  $endgroup$
  – MarcoB
  1 hour ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  2
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  No, not that desperate ... By the way, you guys are tough! Imagine a classroom where a student gives an answer/suggestion that is not correct. Or a collaboration with somebody making a mistake. Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks. May hurt creativity ... But we will have strictly precise, quality answers!!
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  1 hour ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @mjw "Seems that "Mathematica Stack Exchange" culture does not like people taking risks." To the contrary. I was really surprise that posts in this threads were downvoted so quickly. Downvotes on answers are actually very uncommon on this site.
  $endgroup$
  – Henrik Schumacher
  58 mins ago
  

  
  
  
  


• 
  
  
  

  
  1
  

  
  
  
  
  
  

  
  $begingroup$
  @Ivan, yes, point well taken! Could be an artifact. But why is the ArcLength[] returning wrong results? Seems that in both cases Mathematica is undersampling ...
  $endgroup$
  – mjw
  45 mins ago
  
  
  

  
  
  
  

 | 
show 9 more comments

$begingroup$

Manipulate[ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}], {p, 0.01, 1}]

gives this plot at $p=0.01$:

(An unpreprocessing plot was here.)

Yes, looks to be approaching two sides of a square, but the sides are shrinking!

UPDATE:

p = 0.01; ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{0, 1.1}, {0, 1.1}}]

So yes, the sides are not shrinking, but Mathematica seems to be missing some of the curve ...

share|improve this answer

edited 59 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

$endgroup$

Manipulate[ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}], {p, 0.01, 1}]

p = 0.01; ParametricPlot[{Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}, {t, 0, Pi/2}, Axes -> False, Frame -> True, PlotRange -> {{0, 1.1}, {0, 1.1}}]

share|improve this answer

edited 59 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

answered 1 hour ago

mjwmjw

5779

2

$begingroup$

I can only provide an alternative to bypass ArcLength.

The points pts of a quarter circle are scaled such that they lie on the desired curve; afterwards the length of the polygonal line is computed. You will still get problems for values of p very close to 0, but at least you may obtain a qualitatively correct plot (so I hope).

Certainly this method won't provide you with the best possible accuracy. The relative error between the arclength $ell$ of an arc and the length $s$ of a secant is roughly $|ell/s - 1| leq ell^2 , max(|kappa|)$ in the limit of $ell to 0$. Since the maximal curvature in of curve goes to $infty$ for $p to infty$, the quality of this approximation will reduce significantly for $p to 0$.

n = 10000;

pts = Transpose[{Cos[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]], Sin[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]]}];

L[p_] := With[{x = pts/Power[Dot[(Abs[pts]^(1/p)), {1., 1.}], p]},

  Total[Sqrt[Dot[Differences[x]^2, {1., 1.}]]]

  ]

Plot[L[p], {p, 0.001, 1}]

share|improve this answer

edited 50 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

I can only provide an alternative to bypass ArcLength.

The points pts of a quarter circle are scaled such that they lie on the desired curve; afterwards the length of the polygonal line is computed. You will still get problems for values of p very close to 0, but at least you may obtain a qualitatively correct plot (so I hope).

Certainly this method won't provide you with the best possible accuracy. The relative error between the arclength $ell$ of an arc and the length $s$ of a secant is roughly $|ell/s - 1| leq ell^2 , max(|kappa|)$ in the limit of $ell to 0$. Since the maximal curvature in of curve goes to $infty$ for $p to infty$, the quality of this approximation will reduce significantly for $p to 0$.

n = 10000;

pts = Transpose[{Cos[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]], Sin[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]]}];

L[p_] := With[{x = pts/Power[Dot[(Abs[pts]^(1/p)), {1., 1.}], p]},

  Total[Sqrt[Dot[Differences[x]^2, {1., 1.}]]]

  ]

Plot[L[p], {p, 0.001, 1}]

share|improve this answer

edited 50 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

I can only provide an alternative to bypass ArcLength.

The points pts of a quarter circle are scaled such that they lie on the desired curve; afterwards the length of the polygonal line is computed. You will still get problems for values of p very close to 0, but at least you may obtain a qualitatively correct plot (so I hope).

Certainly this method won't provide you with the best possible accuracy. The relative error between the arclength $ell$ of an arc and the length $s$ of a secant is roughly $|ell/s - 1| leq ell^2 , max(|kappa|)$ in the limit of $ell to 0$. Since the maximal curvature in of curve goes to $infty$ for $p to infty$, the quality of this approximation will reduce significantly for $p to 0$.

n = 10000;

pts = Transpose[{Cos[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]], Sin[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]]}];

L[p_] := With[{x = pts/Power[Dot[(Abs[pts]^(1/p)), {1., 1.}], p]},

  Total[Sqrt[Dot[Differences[x]^2, {1., 1.}]]]

  ]

Plot[L[p], {p, 0.001, 1}]

share|improve this answer

edited 50 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

$endgroup$

n = 10000;

pts = Transpose[{Cos[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]], Sin[Subdivide[0., Pi/2, n]]}];

L[p_] := With[{x = pts/Power[Dot[(Abs[pts]^(1/p)), {1., 1.}], p]},

  Total[Sqrt[Dot[Differences[x]^2, {1., 1.}]]]

  ]

Plot[L[p], {p, 0.001, 1}]

share|improve this answer

edited 50 mins ago

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

answered 1 hour ago

Henrik SchumacherHenrik Schumacher

56.6k577156

2

$begingroup$

Seems to be a precision thing.

L[p_] = {Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}



ArcLength[L[1/100], {t, 0, π/2}, WorkingPrecision -> 1000]



1.99447959240474567...

share|improve this answer

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

2

$begingroup$

Seems to be a precision thing.

L[p_] = {Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}



ArcLength[L[1/100], {t, 0, π/2}, WorkingPrecision -> 1000]



1.99447959240474567...

share|improve this answer

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

$endgroup$

add a comment | 

$begingroup$

Seems to be a precision thing.

L[p_] = {Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}



ArcLength[L[1/100], {t, 0, π/2}, WorkingPrecision -> 1000]



1.99447959240474567...

share|improve this answer

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

$endgroup$

L[p_] = {Cos[t]^p, Sin[t]^p}



ArcLength[L[1/100], {t, 0, π/2}, WorkingPrecision -> 1000]



1.99447959240474567...

share|improve this answer

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620

answered 25 mins ago

Bill WattsBill Watts

3,4811620