this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2024
415 points (94.8% liked)

Technology

59467 readers
4600 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@fry.gs
L4s@fry.gs
enu@lemmy.world
415
Secret calculator hack brings ChatGPT to the TI-84, enabling easy cheating (arstechnica.com)
submitted 2 months ago by Amicitas@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
104 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] VintageGenious@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

The use of for makes sense.

k=0; for (i=0; i<n; i++) k=k+f(i); is the same as k=\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} f(i)

and

k=1; for (i=0; i<n; i++) k=k*f(i); is the same as k=\prod_{i=0}^{n-1} f(i)

In our case, f(i)=1+r and k=1; for (i=0; i<n; i++) k*(1+r); is the same as k=\prod_{i=0}^{n-1} (1+r) = (1+r)^n

All of that just to say that exponentiation is an iteration of multiplication, the same way that multiplication is an iteration of addition