I was wondering how this method developed and also how it works to give the square root of a number upto a large number of decimal digits . Please guide me.
2026-03-31 11:25:51.1774956351
how or why the method long division for finding square root of a number works
778 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in IRRATIONAL-NUMBERS
- Convergence of a rational sequence to a irrational limit
- $\alpha$ is an irrational number. Is $\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty}n\{ n\alpha\}$ always positive?
- Is this : $\sqrt{3+\sqrt{2+\sqrt{3+\sqrt{2+\sqrt{\cdots}}}}}$ irrational number?
- ls $\sqrt{2}+\sqrt{3}$ the only sum of two irrational which close to $\pi$?
- Find an equation where all 'y' is always irrational for all integer values of x
- Is a irrational number still irrational when we apply some mapping to its decimal representation?
- Density of a real subset $A$ such that $\forall (a,b) \in A^2, \ \sqrt{ab} \in A$
- Proof of irrationality
- Is there an essential difference between Cartwright's and Niven's proofs of the irrationality of $\pi$?
- Where am I making a mistake in showing that countability isn't a thing?
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
You presumably refer to the Babylonian method to evaluate square roots via divisions.
Assume that you want to compute the square root of $a$ and yo have an estimate $x\approx \sqrt a$. Then
$$x<\sqrt a\iff \frac ax>\sqrt a$$ so that if the estimate is too small (too large), $\dfrac ax$ is another estimate, too large (too small). And it turns out that the average of the two
$$\frac12\left(x+\frac ax\right)$$
is a much better estimate. You can repeat the computation at will.
E.g. for $\sqrt 2$,
$$1\to\frac32\to\frac{17}{12}\to\frac{577}{408}\to\frac{665857}{470832}\to\cdots$$
The square of the last fraction is $2.0000000000045\cdots$
Technical note 1:
The formula is an embodiment of Newton's method to solve nonlinear equations. It works by locally replacing the graph of the function at hand by its tangent. For the square root, we want to solve
$$f(t)=t^2-a=0.$$ The tangent to $f$ at a given $t$ has the equation
$$y=2t(x-t)+(t^2-a).$$ Then the solution of $y=0$ is
$$x=\frac{t^2+a}{2t}=\frac12\left(t+\frac at\right).$$
Technical note 2:
To study convergence of the iterations observe that
$$x_{n+1}=\frac{x_n^2+a}{2x_n}$$
implies
$$\frac{x_{n+1}-\sqrt a}{x_{n+1}+\sqrt a}=\frac{x_n^2-2x_n\sqrt a+a}{x_n^2+2x_n\sqrt a+a}=\left(\frac{x_{n}-\sqrt a}{x_{n}+\sqrt a}\right)^2$$
and by induction,
$$\frac{x_{n}-\sqrt a}{x_{n}+\sqrt a}=\left(\frac{x_0-\sqrt a}{x_0+\sqrt a}\right)^{2^n}.$$
For any positive $x_0$, the fraction on the right is smaller than $1$, and its powers tend to $0$ very quickly. Hence convergence of $x_n$ to $\sqrt a$ is guaranteed from any initial value.
Even with a very bad initial value,
$$(1-\epsilon)^2\approx 1-2\epsilon$$ shows that you gain at least one exact bit one every iteration. But when you are close, the number of bits doubles every time !
If you are referring to the written calculus method using the decimal representation, it is based on the identity
$$(10x+d)^2=100x^2+20xd+d^2.$$
If at some stage of the computation, you have obtained a $k$-digits approximation $x$ to the square root $x^2\approx a$, you can obtain a better approximation by appending another digit, and you take the largest such that $100x^2+20xd+d^2\le a$.
In this expression, the first term is the square of $x$ shifted left by two positions, then next is twice $x$ times the digit and shifted, and of course $d^2$ is the squared digit. For the choice of the digit, you rely on $20xd\simeq a-100x^2$ and perform the quick division $\dfrac{a-100x^2}{20x}$.
[I left implicit that as you go, you incorporate more and more digits of $a$, two by two, so that $a$ and $x^2$ are on the same order. Sorry for lack of rigor.]