[Date Index]
[Thread Index]
[Author Index]
Re: Sin[30*Degree] vs Sin[29*Degree]
*To*: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
*Subject*: [mg72098] Re: [mg72057] Sin[30*Degree] vs Sin[29*Degree]
*From*: Murray Eisenberg <murray at math.umass.edu>
*Date*: Mon, 11 Dec 2006 04:55:36 -0500 (EST)
*Organization*: Mathematics & Statistics, Univ. of Mass./Amherst
*References*: <200612100949.EAA17387@smc.vnet.net>
*Reply-to*: murray at math.umass.edu
The behavior is totally consistent. Sin[30 Degree] can be expressed as
an exact fraction. Apparently the others cannot.
Why is the result (shown below in Inputform) in
Sin[29 Degree]
Sin[29*Degree]
any more unexpected than the result in the following?
Sin[29 Pi/180]
Sin[29 Pi/180]
Steven Shippee wrote:
> What is happening here:
>
> Sin[30*Degree]
> Sin[31*Degree]
> Sin[29*Degree]
> which makes it appear that only the first line of input works?
>
> However, if I do something like:
>
> \!\(Sin[\(29*Pi\)\/180. ]\)
>
> I get the expected result ... I'm sure it is me, what am I missing in that I
> think I am not seeing consistent behavior?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Steven Shippee
>
> slshippee at comcast.net
>
>
>
>
--
Murray Eisenberg murray at math.umass.edu
Mathematics & Statistics Dept.
Lederle Graduate Research Tower phone 413 549-1020 (H)
University of Massachusetts 413 545-2859 (W)
710 North Pleasant Street fax 413 545-1801
Amherst, MA 01003-9305
Prev by Date:
**Re: FullSimplify and HypergeometricPFQ**
Next by Date:
**Re: InverseLaplaceTransform**
Previous by thread:
**Sin[30*Degree] vs Sin[29*Degree]**
Next by thread:
**Re: Sin[30*Degree] vs Sin[29*Degree]**
| |