Timeline for Is there any simple method to calculate $\sqrt x$ without using logarithm
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 18, 2014 at 10:59 | comment | added | user21820 | @Hurkyl: I don't know what method you're referring to, but there is a simple way to accelerate the convergence of this sequence directly, since the numerator and denominator of its convergents are described by recurrence relations and hence the $k$-th convergent is expressible as the corresponding matrix raised to the $k$-th power and then multiplied by some matrix corresponding to the initial values of the recurrences. The matrix exponentiation can be done by repeated squaring. | |
| Dec 22, 2013 at 7:38 | comment | added | user14972 | If this turns into an odd method I remember seeing once, there turns out to be a simple way to step quadratically through the sequence. i.e. after $n$ steps, you are looking at $\epsilon_{2^n}$, not $\epsilon_n$. | |
| Oct 25, 2013 at 14:26 | history | edited | Eric Jablow | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Fix a stray factor of 2. |
| Oct 25, 2013 at 1:00 | history | edited | Eric Jablow | CC BY-SA 3.0 | Fix typo. |
| Oct 24, 2013 at 22:44 | comment | added | Eric Jablow | This should be slower than Newton's method for square roots. With Newton, $\epsilon_{n+1}\approx k\epsilon_n^2$. | |
| Oct 24, 2013 at 21:50 | comment | added | Max | I wonder how quickly this converges compared to Newton's method. | |
| Oct 24, 2013 at 21:01 | history | answered | Eric Jablow | CC BY-SA 3.0 |