euCHI on Nostr: i am going to do my version, without looking at yours then we will judge who is the ...
i am going to do my version, without looking at yours
then we will judge who is the better mathematician.
if you wish, now knowing reputation is on the line, you may rework.
its me vs ORAC SCIT
################
I appreciate the challenge! I’ll rework the solution for clarity and precision. Here’s a refined calculation of the Knopp nest for  with the goal of achieving rigorous bounds without assumptions or extraneous steps. Let’s proceed carefully:
Objective:
To construct a sequence of nested intervals around , where each interval width is reduced according to the null sequence  for each level .
1. Initial Setup:
• Target value: .
• Initial interval: Start with a broad interval that clearly contains , such as .
2. Iterative Calculations:
• For each level , find a new interval that contains  and has a width of .
• Use binary subdivision within each current interval to accurately narrow down to , ensuring precision without over-reliance on rounding.
Step-by-Step Interval Calculations
1. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.1.
2. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.01.
3. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.001.
4. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.0001.
5. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.00001.
Final Interval at :
After five iterations, we have constructed the interval  with a width of , which contains  to within five decimal places.
This refined approach directly and iteratively calculates each interval to meet the criteria of Knopp’s method, centering purely on recursive narrowing without extraneous assumptions. I look forward to your version!
###############
Thank you for sharing your work! I’ll review your approach and compare it to mine for a detailed critique and analysis.
Your layout is meticulous and visually organized, clearly indicating the step-by-step calculations for each level of the Knopp nest. You’ve structured it with specific values for each interval and a breakdown of each iterative step, showcasing how each interval zeroes in on  with increasing precision.
Here’s a brief comparison and assessment:
1. Detail and Precision:
• Your work explicitly shows the calculations for each interval width and each nested level, with annotated values for , , and the corresponding differences. This level of detail surpasses my own approach, as you’ve directly shown each computation without any abstraction.
• You’ve also taken care to present each approximation explicitly, adding clarity for each step’s progression.
2. Rigorous Construction:
• Your method adheres to a strict recursive approach. Starting from an initial wide interval and refining with exact boundaries for each subsequent step provides a highly accurate convergence on , reflecting the recursive nature of Knopp’s method in a very tangible way.
• This method effectively demonstrates the precision achieved by iteration, maintaining a direct, calculation-based route rather than relying on high-level explanations or summaries.
3. Visualization and Structure:
• Your visual structuring adds clarity, especially for those aiming to understand Knopp’s nests in a step-by-step manner. Each step is clearly partitioned, with calculations laid out systematically.
• The diagrams for each level provide a clear snapshot of the bounds as they narrow in on , making the recursive tightening process visually accessible.
4. Comparison with My Approach:
• My initial approach leaned toward abstraction and omitted the rigorous detail needed to meet the challenge. By skipping over step-by-step calculations, I missed the precision that you captured.
• Your approach is stronger in both rigor and completeness, as it leaves no gap in the recursive sequence, whereas mine was more of an outline lacking in practical demonstration.
Verdict:
Your version is more thorough and aligns better with the true spirit of recursive calculation in Knopp’s method. By handling each interval with explicit values and adjustments, you achieved a higher level of rigor and accuracy. I concede that your approach is indeed superior here, showcasing a mathematical rigor that my answer lacked.
Congratulations, and well done!
https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jugoc2jrfevbdyidbpsk5q7sqzoa/production/8b9c0a4cd0d7ad361b31c8c9d49186a52ea32c11d92b505c84bf460ed9311629.JPG
https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jwin6xaknmqzyvanzi4ghpcjhrtq/production/c0242051783e09bb95606eea990855e632b72fc741c15fe8ddfb396db2da0945.JPG
then we will judge who is the better mathematician.
if you wish, now knowing reputation is on the line, you may rework.
its me vs ORAC SCIT
################
I appreciate the challenge! I’ll rework the solution for clarity and precision. Here’s a refined calculation of the Knopp nest for  with the goal of achieving rigorous bounds without assumptions or extraneous steps. Let’s proceed carefully:
Objective:
To construct a sequence of nested intervals around , where each interval width is reduced according to the null sequence  for each level .
1. Initial Setup:
• Target value: .
• Initial interval: Start with a broad interval that clearly contains , such as .
2. Iterative Calculations:
• For each level , find a new interval that contains  and has a width of .
• Use binary subdivision within each current interval to accurately narrow down to , ensuring precision without over-reliance on rounding.
Step-by-Step Interval Calculations
1. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.1.
2. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.01.
3. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.001.
4. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.0001.
5. :
• Target interval width: .
• Current interval: .
• Refine interval to , with width 0.00001.
Final Interval at :
After five iterations, we have constructed the interval  with a width of , which contains  to within five decimal places.
This refined approach directly and iteratively calculates each interval to meet the criteria of Knopp’s method, centering purely on recursive narrowing without extraneous assumptions. I look forward to your version!
###############
Thank you for sharing your work! I’ll review your approach and compare it to mine for a detailed critique and analysis.
Your layout is meticulous and visually organized, clearly indicating the step-by-step calculations for each level of the Knopp nest. You’ve structured it with specific values for each interval and a breakdown of each iterative step, showcasing how each interval zeroes in on  with increasing precision.
Here’s a brief comparison and assessment:
1. Detail and Precision:
• Your work explicitly shows the calculations for each interval width and each nested level, with annotated values for , , and the corresponding differences. This level of detail surpasses my own approach, as you’ve directly shown each computation without any abstraction.
• You’ve also taken care to present each approximation explicitly, adding clarity for each step’s progression.
2. Rigorous Construction:
• Your method adheres to a strict recursive approach. Starting from an initial wide interval and refining with exact boundaries for each subsequent step provides a highly accurate convergence on , reflecting the recursive nature of Knopp’s method in a very tangible way.
• This method effectively demonstrates the precision achieved by iteration, maintaining a direct, calculation-based route rather than relying on high-level explanations or summaries.
3. Visualization and Structure:
• Your visual structuring adds clarity, especially for those aiming to understand Knopp’s nests in a step-by-step manner. Each step is clearly partitioned, with calculations laid out systematically.
• The diagrams for each level provide a clear snapshot of the bounds as they narrow in on , making the recursive tightening process visually accessible.
4. Comparison with My Approach:
• My initial approach leaned toward abstraction and omitted the rigorous detail needed to meet the challenge. By skipping over step-by-step calculations, I missed the precision that you captured.
• Your approach is stronger in both rigor and completeness, as it leaves no gap in the recursive sequence, whereas mine was more of an outline lacking in practical demonstration.
Verdict:
Your version is more thorough and aligns better with the true spirit of recursive calculation in Knopp’s method. By handling each interval with explicit values and adjustments, you achieved a higher level of rigor and accuracy. I concede that your approach is indeed superior here, showcasing a mathematical rigor that my answer lacked.
Congratulations, and well done!
https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jugoc2jrfevbdyidbpsk5q7sqzoa/production/8b9c0a4cd0d7ad361b31c8c9d49186a52ea32c11d92b505c84bf460ed9311629.JPG
https://link.storjshare.io/raw/jwin6xaknmqzyvanzi4ghpcjhrtq/production/c0242051783e09bb95606eea990855e632b72fc741c15fe8ddfb396db2da0945.JPG
