Threaded Mode | Linear Mode

C.Ret · (This post was last modified: 04-02-2022 09:19 AM by C.Ret.)

(04-01-2022 09:43 PM)J-F Garnier Wrote: It seems that all the suspects have good reasons to claim they are innocent.
We need to review again our list, but that will be for tomorrow...

Since we are looking for a suspect that was silent for a so long time, we can't based you investigation only on suspicion. Any suspect have to be interrogated et tested.

Afaik, I just realize that I have only material from the "nut" part and no way to test any "spice" calculator Sad

(04-02-2022 03:02 AM)Paul Dale Wrote: I think the key here is the series of operations.

But, Valentin clearly indicate that there is only one specific operation that produces a different result !
Can not be due to the way several operations are chained or any cumulative error's handled.

(04-02-2022 08:13 AM)Martin Hepperle Wrote: The limited parameter range of only up to 1500 also suggests something like LN/LOG (excluded), e^X (excluded).

We can trust the indications given by Valentin, if these operations have to be exclude, that is for sure that they are out of the scope.

But you observation about the given range [ 0.1 , 1500 ] is for sure of a primary importance and may certainly indicate something else that what we are suspecting.

At first, this interval makes me believe it is about any trigonometric operation.
But Valentin clearly state and insist about a true, simple and single arithmetic operation.

So, I will let apart sin, cos, tan and √× for the moment.

For the arithmetic operations [ + ] or [ - ] this range is safe and may produce the same results even between oldest and old calculettes.

For arithmetic operation [ × ] this range is safe enough to produce similar results between "spice" and "nuts".

For arithmetic operation [ ÷ ] this range trigger me.
In one direction, it looks really safe and difference may really surprise me. But what about the opposite direction ?

In one hand:
1500 [ENTER^] 0.1 [ ÷ ] may display 15000. on all HP calculators without any worry about the age or the exact technology of the specific model.

In the other hand:
0.1 [ENTER^] 1500 [ ÷ ] may not necessary display the same exact result.

Unfortunately, as I already say it, I have no "spice" to test, but the few models ("nut") I just test all display : 0.000066667

May the "spice" have display this result a different way ?
For example an alternative format close to 6.666666-05 ?