(www.scientificamerican.com)

190 points baruchel | 2 comments | 27 Jun 25 13:59 UTC | HN request time: 0.407s | source

Show context

bluenose69 ◴[30 Jun 25 12:41 UTC] No.44422559[source]▶

Here's a quote from the SciAm article: "Technically, that equation was t/log(t), but for the numbers involved log(t) is typically negligibly small."

Huh?

1. fwip ◴[30 Jun 25 15:40 UTC] No.44424629[source]▶

t/log(t) is 'closer to' t than it is to sqrt(t) as t heads toward infinity.

e.g:

    4/log2(4) = 4/2 = 2
    sqrt(4) = 2

    2^32/log2(2^32) = 2^32/32 = 2^27
    sqrt(2^32) = 2^16

replies(1): >>44426082 #

2. tgv ◴[30 Jun 25 17:52 UTC] No.44426082[source]▶

In case someone doesn't like the proof by example, here's a hint: sqrt(t) = t / sqrt(t).

New proof dramatically compresses space needed for computation