Re: Bad Precision output for SphericaBesselY and BesselY

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg123083] Re: Bad Precision output for SphericaBesselY and BesselY
• From: "Oleksandr Rasputinov" <oleksandr_rasputinov at hmamail.com>
• Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 07:04:03 -0500 (EST)
• Delivered-to: l-mathgroup@mail-archive0.wolfram.com
• References: <jafud8\$rrr\$1@smc.vnet.net>

```On Tue, 22 Nov 2011 10:43:52 -0000, Antonio Alvaro Ranha Neves
<aneves at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear users,
>
> Recently I'm working with precision calculations of spherical functions.
> Example, let,
>
> n = 150
> x = SetPrecision[120.3, 100]
> BesselY[n + 1/2, x] // Precision
> BesselJ[n+ 1/2, x] // Precision
>
>
> Yields 67.2708 and 96.9297 respectively. The two questions are:
> 1) Why does BesselY results in a worse than BesselJ?
> 2) How to redefine, BesselY to automatically output a result with a
> desired pecision?
>
> Note: Simply using N[expr,90], does not yield a result of expr with 90
> precision but maintains the same 67.2708.
>
> Thanks,
> Antonio
>
>

Both functions lose precision, and BesselY loses a lot. Why this would be
I don't know off-hand as I'm not sure what method these functions use to
calculate their outputs. However, the essential problem is that there
isn't enough precision in your input. If you try

x = SetPrecision[120.3, Infinity]

or better

x = Rationalize[120.3]

then N is able to give you an output with the full 90 digits of precision
in both cases.

```

• Prev by Date: x/2 pr
• Next by Date: Re: How to get sub-list elements at certain position in a long list