Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

7
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your answer. But by rationalizing the coefficient by approximating it with 0.0001 precision, aren't you solving a different problem than the original one?! $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 19, 2014 at 19:32
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Could rationalize it to tighter tolerance, say 10^(-100). I'm not clear on what is meant by "solving a different problem" though. It's certainly different from what's there if no rationalization is done-- any rationalizing will move it to a "nearby' problem. But that was true of the original formulation, when rationalizing actually takes place (which it does, on some coefficients). $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 19, 2014 at 23:38
  • $\begingroup$ In principle, the tolerance on the coefficients could be set tighter, to 10^-100, as Daniel suggests, but Mathematica's Rationalize function isn't up to that task. It can't do much better than 10^-10, as indicated in the P.S. to my original answer. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 20, 2014 at 2:00
  • $\begingroup$ I don't understand the comment about Rationalize not being able to get within 10^(-100). The numbers in question had around 16 decimal places so these can typically be approximated by rationals with 10 or fewer digits in numerator and denominator (worst case: 16 digits). But that doesn't mean we fell outside the 10^(-100) bound in terms of how close we are. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 20, 2014 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ You are correct. I was only making the point that numbers with only 16 digits of precision are not going to get turned into rationals with 100-digit denominators by Rationalize. To see what Rationalize does, I ran $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 20, 2014 at 15:06