B22 ==== The other day I went through the programs I've got in the LIB, now my calc doesn't want to display these kind of fractions anymore 1 - 2 It will always display .5, and sometimes even use the E-whatever after the number. I don't like it. Which flag did I set? or is it some program running. ==== your calc is in approximate mode. Just type 'CASCFG' and press Enter. Roman ==== CASCFG does a lot more than just set Exact mode, so I'd recommend avoiding it except when really needed. My favorite solution to the unwanted Approx mode prolem is to type XQ. This would convert your .5 into 1/2 *and* change the HP49G to Exact mode, all in one swell foop. The reverse operation, by the way, is XNUM. These only work if there's something on the stack. If you have a recent enough ROM version, you can easily toggle Exact/Approx mode by pressing the ENTER key while holding down the right-shift key; watch the annunciators in the top line and see = (Exact mode) or ~ (Approx mode). In any ROM version, you can also press MODE CAS and then check or uncheck Approx. You can programmatically turn on Exact mode by -105 CF, and turn on Approx mode by -105 SF. Hope this helps! -Joe- ==== I prefer having the Vectored ENTER flag on (as well as User flag) then having the following program at Home level in variable BetaENTER (Beta= the Greek letter Beta) You may add more flags to the list in case something else that the CAS keeps on changing bothers you. It is also advisable now to set the CAS in silent mode switch flag. my .03_euro PS: one may also use CASCFG while trying some examples like the many in Urroz's books...(not always advisable) Exact/Approx watch mode). ==== The baby has arrived today: an old Casio fx 4000P that I've bought for 6? in ebay last week. Just nostalgia. It was one of the most desired calculators among my classmates while we were studing Chemistry in the middle of the 80's: one of the first affordable alphanumeric calculators, and one of the first pure algebraic, where you can write normal: sin 30, ln 2, etc. And best of all, 550 prg steps! I have been playing and programming it, now, comparing it with the 15C (1982). The Casio is quicker: calculating P100,50 takes more than 7 seconds in the hp but it's almost instantaneus in the casio. Its alphanumeric screen is beatiful. Its statistical capabilities are better ( I need a program for entering 1 var or 2 var with freq in the hp)... and nothing else The hp is solid and durable. The keyboard is much better (not as those casio very little keys). It's humble segment screen is big and easy readable. And the matrix operations, a blessing. BUT above all, RPN is much efficient than the algebraic system: is very boring pressing ANS all the time and most of prgs are 30-50% shorter in RPN. As Jean Lemire has posted, RPN is THE way. ==== Almost instantaneous on the TI-89 as well (less than 0.1 second). -- Bhuvanesh ==== Sean, I was very much like you for a long time in that I couldn't 'get' RPN. I just couldn't figure out how to think in RPN mode. I guess I've had my HP49G for two years (first RPN calc for me) and I still consider myself a newbie, but about 6 months ago, and after visiting this newsgroup almost daily, something suddenly clicked and I haven't gone back. I still think RPN is difficult to read but its very easy to calculate in RPN. I don't know about you, but I have a little voice in my head whenever I perform calculations, either with paper or with a calculator. When it finally clicked, it was because I realized that I 'think' in RPN mode. Haha. Anyway, some very useful keys on the HP49G while working in RPN are 'ENTER' which duplicates the last entry on the stack (DUP command), and the right arrow, which swaps the last two entries on the stack (SWAP command). There's one last thing; when all else fails and you need to enter something as you read it while in RPN mode, just put it within single quotes. Simple enough. Hope this helps, - Ian ==== the As on the hp48. ==== We should now go back to number crunching and feed a 16x16 numerical matrix to both TI 89 & HP 49 and see which one is faster in inverting it. :-) PS: try 32z32, too! (It may not fit into a puny TI - hee, hee) Ti sucks in matrix inversion and big time, 2. ==== I'm sure, but I don't understand why Bhuvanesh started to talk about his famous TI-89... I was only comparing two old calculators of the 80's. Or better, comparing my feelings while playing with them. ==== Wouldn't everyone who uses it be interested? I am! Why not post it? Or upload it to www.hpcalc.org? Dennis ==== Alain is trying to contact with the author for the uploading. This is the trick I received from Alain: 220000222200000002 with 220000222200000022 (2 is gazeous, 0 is solid). He sent to me the 49 version (that I don't need) and I used his trick for correcting my 48 version. If you don't have the tools for doing the work, I'll send you the final library. ==== Wolfgang, we're still waiting to see your version! Werner ==== CODE GOSBVL =PopASavptr AD1EX C=DAT1 A LA(5) =DOLIB ?C=A A GOYES LDBE4C GOVLNG =GPPushFLoop LDBE4C GOVLNG =GPPushTLoop ENDCODE it is TYPELIB? it is correct???? GaaK ==== yes. MS has trouble with xcale processors. http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-940329.html i wonder how many times (and how fast) they keep changing OSs. they already have a new one for the PC (called long horn or something like that)that works like linux! instead of fixing the old ones, they keep making new ones so that they get free of any guilt and create revenew. they have been circling around and now they are getting closer to linux. it wouldn't surprise me if later on they claim that they invented linux (under a different name). oh well ... ==== According to intel docs, The XScale should be twice faster (at double frequency) at executung ARM code than the SA1110, and could be even faster if the software is corectly optimised. Not the other way around. I wonder where the speed problems really comes from. the fact that the multiplier between the core and the bus jumped from 2 to 4? higher latency in case of cache mist? crappy new cache? or something more subtle? who (I've as XScale ==== In my experiance with working on the XScale CPU on a Sony Clie NX70V, methodology and with branch prediction. It has little or nothing at all to do with code being compiled for ARM V4 or V5 architecture. I've compiled Power48, my HP48/49 emulator, with both architectures, with no appreciable difference in speed. XScale's cache alogrithm are prone to heavy thrashing when memory data is not spatially close, whereas other ARM implementations seem to handle this much better. For instance, a pixel dissolving algorithm than on a 200 MHz XScale, the only difference being that the TI has a much more intelligent cacheing algorithm. Branch prediction also suffers on the XScale, with the penalty for incorrect prediction can be as high as 4 to 5 clock cycles. Just FYI, ==== There was a war between MS and Intel saying that it was the other fault's are working putting LInux/Familiar on iPAQ 3900 and 1900 ;-) J.Manrique http://www.asturlinux.org/~jsmanrique Users Club from Gij.97n http://www.etsiig.uniovi.es/asociaciones/clubusu #1077 HPCC Member http://www.hpcc.org ==== [...] [...] Imagine a HP handheld/calculator using TI OMAP processor :))) J.Manrique http://www.asturlinux.org/~jsmanrique ==== sharp is releasing the new zaurus models with xscale processors (400Mhz). in the mean time, if you want more info about this, you http://www.tomshardware.com/mobile/02q4/021107/index.html ==== I don't have to imagine! ;-) Power48 now runs on a Palm Tungsten T, and supports the HP48SX, HP48GX and HP49G. Emulation speed is roughly four times faster than the real thing on a Tungsten T using the OMAP (even better on a Sony NX60/70). It should be out in the public's hands by early December! Sorry, I couldn't resist the chance to toot my own horn! ==== Oh, the HP40G is allowed to crash on you now? ==== No, it is not okay for the calc to crash, but does he realize what he is integrating and whether or not the CAS has a bug is the question. -- Black holes are where God divided by zero. -Steven Wright ==== He COULD just be plain curious about what the calc might throw back at him for asking that interesting question - a crash is not acceptable in any way. The input is legal - what would you say if Mathematica erased the boot sector of your HDD if you asked it that question? ==== Theorem. For each congruence, x == a (mod m), put vector [a m] on the stack. While there are more than one such vector stacked up, the command will solve the last two on the stack, provided there is any solution. The resultant value of 'a' will be that closest to zero. To find only least nonnegative solutions, add the modulus to any such negative values. Example: [2 3] [4 7] ICHINREM results in [-10 21] Add the new modulus, 21 here, to get smallest non-negative solution, [11,21]. Checking: -10 == 11 == 2 (mod 3) and -10 == 11 == 4 (mod 7) Note that the CHINREM command is for polynomial congruences, not integer congruences. ==== doesn't your laptop use USB? if so, you can use one of the adapters (RS232-USB)that sell for $30. you are going to have a lot of trouble talking through two modems. ==== Well, I think it is still healthier to eat healthy food, also in the sense you are refering to. Celery as a plant isn't dead from the beginning. Most food dies during the expensive processing to make it suitable for the food industry. Thomas [...] [...] ==== I need a good electrotehnics program for my 48gx. Does anyone have a clue what to get and where ? -- Fico [Remove _NO SPAM_ to reply] ==== Hallo How do i enter (15 < 90) i the EQW, where < is the angle sign? Martin ==== I still can't make it work. when I enter (15, GreenRighShift6 90) I get (15*90) which is 1350 and not (15 arg 90). I can enter (15;16) in EQW but it is rectangular and not polar. ==== You can't enter number in polar forms in the EQW. EQW aim is to edit expression, and the HP49 doesn't support automatic polar form with symbolic expression. ==== Is it possible to make the EQW to understand lists (using internal list processing?) so that we could continue after multiple answers and also be able to use in the EQW those commands that require a list as argument... Just a thought... X polar I've just received a brand new HP 32Sii, sealed in its blister packaging. Someone at this NG found and old stock, bought two of them and kindly sold me one for... about US$ 80.00. At first I though I had paid too much but when I saw the prices they are selling it at e-bay and Samson Cables (http://www.samsoncables.com/catalog/prodDetail.cfm?Prod_ID=226&Sku=32SIIBB) eighty dollars seemed a bargain indeed. I wonder how many of these calculators are still there... Once in while there appears someone who says I found one forgotten in a small store, covered with dust.... But, how many of these are expected to be around? How many of them were produced in the last year before they were discontinued? How many were sold? Well, back to the 32Sii, it is the best second calculator for those who own a 48 or 49G. To bad it has been discontinued... It lacks matrix operations and could have a few more bytes in memory, but I love it almost the same way I loved the old 15C I had in '84 (It belongs to my brother now and is still running nicely after all those years...) ==== Hmm, how do I go about trying to find me one of these? Or any non-financial HP pocket calc (OfficeMax has a couple financial models, but no scientifics)? The times I would love to have an RPN calc that fits in my pocket, rather than having to try to remember that no, the ==== you still can get the HP20s calc (algebraic) cheap. http://www.shopping.hp.com/cgi-bin/hpdirect/shopping/scripts/product_detail/ product_detail_view.jsp?product_code=20S%23ABA&aoid=7222&script_name=product . cgi ==== NO Bhuvanesh! I do not want you to leave. This is a newsgroup and not my property! I have no right to either ask that or even wish that. This is a public place for people to speak freely of their mind and this is great. Perhaps you did not notice the cheerful and playful state I was in during my reply (still am). It would be really boring to have exclusively HP freaks (like me) here and reproduce each others crap! Apart from that, it is really great to have the enemy as a 'guest' and torture and beat up on him whenever we feel like :-) It is always good to read your responses! Keep the spirit up. Besides, how come and you thought I was refering to you? I my self use a whole range of TI.. you kow what ;-) !Demeter! ==== If you have no experience and manuals of the hp48-series, the hp49 with his bad manuals will be mostly useless to you and you will need some good but expensive books to manage this calculator. For this reason I can only suggest the Ti. But I would recoment you the Ti89. ==== What I mean is this: When you say anything positive about a TI on a HP newsgroup surely someone will attack, just ignore. You may also try the other way around in a TI newsgroup and the result will be an insult - again! ==== The books are worth every penny! They were more clear than my math books back in university when I studied mechanical engineering. ==== As do I. I have several different doorstops from Ti, an 83, an 86 and an 89. All work flawlessly at helping me keep AN OPEN DOOR POLICY of fairness and objectivity when discussing which is best. Either a 48 or a 49! 8o) Ron ==== Exactly! But seriously now :-) TIs are not so bad (relatively speaking of course). My first programmable calc was a TI66 back in 1985 when I first went to the States to study EE. It was thin and cute and it had the language of the 58/59 but at a much lesser price. Of all the TI_pile_of_ I have I prefer the TI85 with its oblique and hazy screen, huge fonts, austere look and add to that the 28K available! It is really hard to compare calcs and be fair even when they offer similar or even the same functionality. Let alone different brands with different philosophies, such as the crapy TIshits on one hand and the wonderful HPs on the other. Oh dear, enough objectivity for today, I feel content that I did justice to the subject. !Demeter! ==== I don't have them, but when I translated (*) part of the chapter on matrices I could clearly see that it was a piece of crap. Maybe it was not a randomly picked piece, though. (*) http://groups.google.com/groups?&selm=3A15E7A6.CE609C62%40cc.usu.edu ==== But reading that book it was the first time that I understood vector calculus so easily.. PS: Was it a post card of my home town? You will receive it before the end of the year... ==== Where can i get a good emulator for HP 49 G on Windows XP ? And a Sys-RPL editor for Windows XP ? May you help me ? I think iĒm spending a lot of time trying to program in Windows NotePad, transferring it to HP by HP PC Connectivity Kit and then compiling using MASD in HP 49 G. ItĒs good for small programs and when the programs are ok. But itĒs not good for developing and testing. ==== There will be a new PC compiler environment any day now! www.hpcalc.org has a bunch of old tools and two emulators. Use search. ==== You can find emulators for the HP49G at www.hpcalc.org in the emulators section. I use the EMU48 with Windows XP just fine. Most programs designed for windows 2000 also work with XP (cross your fingers!) As for developing, I too use wordpad or other simple text editor. Make sure you save a text only with no formatting. I do all the development on the PC with the emulator, and let MASD assemble it in EMU48. The only transferring done is on completion. EMU48 even lets you save different versions of your calculator loaded with various programs and settings! Dennis ==== --------------------------------------------------------------------- Is there an official web address (v.s. a mirrored site) where I can get the most recently updated pages? Toby boundary=----=_NextPart_000_0027_01C29729.FB9A9360 ==== --------------------------------------------------------------------- Check http://hpcalc.beachnet.org/ ... and yes, that's the latest update... Carlos ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Is there an official web address (v.s. a mirrored site) where I can get the most recently updated pages? Toby ==== A few days ago I tested the TABVAL command with the IFTE involving the variable x and it worked out OK. The table utility, however,failed to produce the correct result! A bug :-( !Demeter! ==== I will have a look into this today and will keep you posted.. ==== I've identified the bug, may take a while to fix, the problem is deep in the CAS ==== Nick Karagiaouroglou :: I am not going to submit executable, because I think of it more as the programming example than utility. It will hopefully appear there today under the name IDClock and sections Docs/Programming and Utils/Time. Best wishes, Robert Tiismus. ==== browser every two minutes, to see if hpcalc is updated. (Without falling in light sleep between the clicks ;-)) Greetings and thanks again, Nick. ==== X THAT'S why there has been trouble with the www.hpcalc.org bandwidth Nick has been hogging it all the time !!! Please Nick! You don't have to keep on clicking. PS: I fall into light sleep every now and then... ==== Oops, I talked too much and now the got me! Am I going to be put in coma mode for that? ;-) ==== answer to my problem(try to recover memory-screen without reaction). some good tip. MY HP49G still alive :-) ==== Wolfgang The Great ==== So what did you do to get it working? ==== Yes please tell us. ==== Dimitri is seemingly so happy on that his 49 returned to life that he has no time to read the NG at present. Therefore, and since some other people have asked for Dear Dimitri, Do not be desperate! It will work, be patient :-) I suppose you did everything advised to you by JYA. I had the same problem some time ago. It is unfortunately not correct what JYA says that no bad SysRPL can damage the ROM, in particular, if you still use a ROM older than 19-6. If everything runs wrong, keep the paperclip in the hole until the screen is black and nothing is running anymore. You then can set in any case the DOWNLOAD menu. Please manipulate delicately with pressing ON and at the same time ENTER and +. Clearly, you must have already prepared the PC and clicked on ROM 19-6 in order to start the downloading process. Read JYA's description once again. The best will be you have it on a toggling PC-screen or an outprint in front of you. Do everything only with fresh batteries! advised and didn't loose any user data in port 2 (which is seemingly never the case). Clearly, the rest is lost. Hallo Herr Professor Rautenberg, Ich habe alles gemacht wie Sie es mir beschrieben haben. Ich habe das OS neu installiert und alles funktioniert wieder. Ich weiss wirklich nicht wie ich mich bei Ihnen bedanken kann. Ich bin so erleichtert. Es war sehr nett von Ihnen mir zu helfen. Ich bin wirklich froh :-). Danke vielmals. Sie haben mir schon einmal(vor c.a einem Jahr wegen emacs fuer hp49) geholfen. Vielen Dank noch mal. - Dimitri - Wolfgang PS. I'm unable to prove that the ROM flash in rare cases can be it is caused by BZDir than it is not the one from OT49 :-) ==== X X Yes, but you didn't translate the answer so I try my 2nd best (in a hurry - as usual :) I have done everything as You it to me described have. I have the OS in new installed and evrything works again. I don't really know how to to thank you I can. I am so reliefed. It was quite nice for You to me help. The best thing is that I did not loose any data (in port 2 naturally). helped.?????? Many thanks once again - Dimitry. Br.9fder-Peter ==== The present version at hpcalc is too old. Longfloat has been updated to version 2.5 and this version will be uploaded to hpcalc today. It is now possible to have automatic evaluation of algebraics and matrix of algebraics for most functions to arbitrary precision. User defined functions in sub expressions are allowed. However, these should normally return longfloat numbers. E.g. 50 ĒDIGITS' STO 1.25 'X' STO 'SIN(Z*pi*X)' evaluates automatically to 50 digits Also, a *single* matrix expression from CAS can be numerically evaluated to arbitrary precision, but use the CAS first to simplify : [['SIN(2*X)' 'SIN(X)' ]] 'Y1' STO [['COS(2*X)']['COS(X)']] 'Y2' STO 'Y1*Y2' ( not allowable simplify first) EVAL and you have evaluated y1*y2 to approximately 50 digits ;-) Note: Although each single function ( e.g. SIN) is evaluated to a precision of +/- 1 in last digit, the resulting precision for e.g. 'SIN(X)*COS(X)*pi' would generally have less precision. And for single algebraics Thomas' unitfunctions are included ;-)) Gjermund Skailand ==== I guess there is no precision tracking? -- Bhuvanesh ==== There has to be, for it to be useful... ==== One could do the algorithm analysis on a PC and then change the internal calculation accuracy of each algorithm to reflect the needed output accuracy. Ofcourse there are cases where certain input ranges require special attention and one much either switch to a different algorithm or change the internal accuracy based on the input value (or exponent). Just some thoughts. ==== When I was in military we had a simple rule: if it you didn't use enough eplosive the fist time then you double and try again. i.e You would have to repeat the calculation with more digits and compare the result. but seriously how would you do presision tracking even on something as simple as a-b where a is almost equal to b or EXP(1/SIN(x)) ,x ~2 pi Wouldn't you have to resort to something likeintervall aritmetic, real exact arithmetic, linear fractional transformations? I'm only using floating point representation. Gjermund ==== X I thought all the errors come free or does HP charge the errors separately nowadays ;-) ==== ROTFL! Nick. ==== Yes, I realized that I meant integer powers after I posted, but the thread strengthen his argument by pointing out that fractional exponents of negative numbers always yielded imaginary results. Sorry again. Bill alternate E-dress wtstorey@ieee.org.no.spam.please (Use the obvious) ==== negative And I'm grateful: with my poor english is often difficult to say what I want. ==== I thought that rpn was supposed to be fast and efficient, but ever since i switched from my 89 to a 48gx it hasnt been the case. Am i doing something wrong? for simple problems such as 5+6+6+7 , a TI would only require 8 keystrokes...yet i find myself doing 5 SPC 6 SPC 6 SPC 7 +++ on my hp...which is a total of 10 keystrokes. i know i could have done 5ENTER 6+ 6+ 7+ but that doesnt work for all problems...considering that u have to worry about order of operation. FURTHERMORE...i find it tedious when it comes to simple problems such as 6+5*6-6/7. The TI automatically takes care of order of operations for me. With the hp i have to always keep order of operation in mind when keying in the number. That doesnt bother me for short problems...but it would be really annoying for longer ones. the hp doesnt seem to know that it has to do 5 * 6 and 6/7 first before doing the subraction and addition...well unless i use the delimiter button...which is another keystroke. Am i missing something...please help a newbie out. ==== That is. doing I n other cases, you will need to use () in your TI, don't you? Example: TI: :(4+5)/(1+2)= HP: 4 enter 5+1enter2+/ PS: Press ' and write algebraicly. Yous'll see how the hp does know to do * and / before + and - ==== Comments interwoven... It takes a little getting used to. When I first got a HP49 (which is very nice btw), I thought most people in this newsgroup were nuts for liking such an arcane thing as RPN. Why complicate things? After a day of playing with the thing, It really seems alot easier to me. It just takes practice. Of course, some people will never like RPN... Perhaps you are thinking about it the wrong way. Here's how I think about it. With algerbraic, you basically type the thing in as you see it and boom, the anwser appears. With RPN, you 'build' the equation step by step. EG for 5+6+7+8, I think: get 5. add 6, then add 7, then add 8 - which translates to 5 enter 6 + 7+ 8 + Not much of an advantage so far I'd admit. I Do it like you would by hand - multiply 5 by 6, then add 6. work out 6 / 7 then subtract. 5 e 6 * 6 + 6 e 7 / - Again, no point for something like this. Here's a trickier problem. Solve: 5^(sqr(7*4^Pi))/(8*9/4+sqr(7^2+5^2)) (30 keystrokes) It would take me several tries to get that right via algerbraic. Put the brackets in the wrong spot and you get the wrong answer. The beauty of RPN here is that as you build the equation, mistakes are very easier to spot and correct. EG: Take 5. Work out 4 to the power of Pi. multiply that by 7. Sqr the result. Put the result as 5's power. etc. etc. etc. 5 e 4 e Pi ^ * sqr ^ 8 e 9 * 4 / 7 sq 5 sq + sqr + / (23 keystrokes) Looks hard like this, but when you have a screen in front of you it;s easy. Saving almost a third of keystrokes is a bonus. both a blessing and a curse. To be honest I don;t know what the delimeter button is... You mean those tick things? Don't think of RPN as a painful chore brought to you by the old school elite (like I used to ;-) but rather as building an equation step by step. The biggest time saver is not having to correct your equation after mismatching brackets. Fewer keystrokes as well. Hope this helps, Al www.alborowski.tk ==== Erm, but what about (5+6)*(3+4)? Algebraic systems deal with the precedence of operations for you when it agrees with the predefined precedences, and only then. --tim ==== I first learned RPN on my HP-45 in 1974 and to me it was THE way to go. In fact it is like I learned in school. For example if you want to add 734 and 136 what I learned was to put 734, then under it, 136, then add like: 734 + 136 ------ 870 With RPN : 734 ENTER 136 + The fun with RPN and a multi line display is that the stack shows the number as you would put them on paper to perform the operation by hand. As for the examples given by others work them the way it was explained in HP instruction books of that era (1970's). Type a number. Can you perform a monadic function on it (monadic means using only one argument, like SIN, SQRT, LOG, etc.). If yes, then do it. If no then press ENTER to push the number on the stack. Type another number. Can you perform a dyadic function (function with two arguments)with the one already on the stack and the one you have just typed. If yes, then do it, if no then press ENTER to push the number on the stack. With HP 48, 49 and the like, you can see the first few levels of the stack and keep an eye on what is going on. With older models like 45, function to manipulate the stack and check intermediate values. So, for a more complex example like: e^3 + 7 / (4 + 5 / 6) You can type: 3 e^x 7 ENTER 4 ENTER 5 ENTER 6 / + / + For a total of 13 keystrokes. Of course you can perform this calculation from the deepest level like: 5 ENTER 6 / 4 + 1/X 7 * 3 e^x + for 12 keystrokes. Not a big saving. Or: 7 ENTER 5 ENTER 6 / 4 + / 3 e^x + Again 12 keystrokes. Hoping that helps a little. Jean Lemire from Montreal. ==== supposed to just typing in the numbers and getting a meaningless answer with the TI...but i'll have to spend some time getting used to RPN...heheh. ==== At the risk of sounding slightly nuts, entering an equation into an algebraic calculator makes me feel like a typist; solving it in RPN is a lot more fun. Neill McKay ==== http://vader.brad.ac.uk/finance/tfp.html A quote from this homepage: Take a look at the chart produced by Tomorrow's Financial Pages. It shows the S&P 500 futures contract to October 2001. I chose this contract as it is well known to many readers and is a great favourite among professional traders. Curiously, TFP does not predict the CLOSE of the S&P very well but is astonishingly good at predicting the OPEN! This opens up the novel idea of the Night Trader, run the figures through TFP just before market close to get a prediction of tomorrow's open and take an appropriate position just before market close. How does he calculate this?? ==== Excuse my bad english. I have a big problem with my hp49g. I try a sys-rpl program today(a part of MoonLight), and now is my hp49 not working. I see only the Try to recover memory screen, and I can do anything. The yes [F1]-key and the no [F6]-key doensn't work, and when I try to use the [ON]-key the calculator make a continuous bip. I try all: [ON][C], [ON][F1][F6], [ON][F3][backspace], RESET on the back of the calculator, take out the battery, NOTHING!! It's terrible. I don't kwon what I should do. Please if someone know how to fix this problem, help me. Dimitri. ==== I am just reposting a fix someone else posted about a similar problem, try what is suggested below, hope it works. Stan. --------- try to reboot with [ON]&[F4] - Q and press while rebooting the backspace-key (The broken lib won't be attached this way). If the library is causing the problems this should solve it. Don't forget to purge the broken lib with the filer. BTW: The program P0erase ist just to be used if the upgrade-process goes wrong and you don't even have acces to the download menu anymore. Hope this helps Roman ---------- to with takes on when ON keyboard just yet ==== hi, Did you try to reboot with [ON]+[F4],[Q]+[BACKSPACE]? The right timing of pressing the backspace is important. If you still should have acces to diagnostic mode ([ON]+[F4]) you can try to reinstall the OS. I assume you have the connectivity kit. If this still doesnt work you can manually format your flash-rom (port 2). I had to do this once to make my calc work again. There is also a program at www.hpcalc.org you could try. The name of the program is P0erase. Hope this helps Good luck Roman ==== I just remembered that he program P0erase makes only sense in case your upgrade process went wrong and you don't have acces to the download menu anymore. The other post above helped me to remember about some other post covering similar problems with hp49g in unusable states. Here is a more detailed guide to bring your calc back to life. Most of this things mentioned you have allready tried. But as an example pressing the backspace at the exactly right time while rebooting the calc is not that easy but important, so you have to try maybe a few times till it works. (make sure you're using new batteries before trying this!!) 1) Press [ON]&[F3] to reboot the calc and while rebooting the backspace key (try this several times as the right timing to press the backspace key is important) if it fails ... 2) Reset your calc with a paperclip (there is a hole on the back of thecalc) if it fails ... 3) try to reset with [ON]&[F4] -Q and press the backspace-key while rebooting (this way an eventually broken lib won't be attached, Don't forgetto delete the broken libs) if it fails ... 4) Reset your calc with [ON]&[F1]&[F6] if it fails ... 5) Download the OS again if it fails ... 6) If you don't have acces to the download menu anymore use P0erase (makes only sense if your upgrade process failed before) 7) Install the OS again if it fails ... 8) Erase bank 8-15 (Port 2) manually, do this in the download-menu. if it fails ... 9) Take the batteries out for some days if it fails ... you have now a very cool paperweight ;-) If the unit is still under warranty get a replacement. Roman ==== When you press YES it may take quite a while (I've seen cases with 30 minutes). If you don't want to wait, simply press NO, but you will loose all your data. Otherwise, Press [ON] and [F3] at the same time. If it fails again, then try pressing [ON]-[F3] and just when you release these two keys, press and hold the backspace key until you see the home screen. Then using the filer delete the corrupted object. If you do not get anything happening with your calculator, then using a paperclip press the reset button in the back of the calculator for about 5s. Then press the ON key and see what happens.. Forget what you've read in other messages like using P0ERASE this has to be used ONLY when the upgrade from rom 1.19-4 (and before) to 1.19-5 or 1.19-6 fails. In your case I doubt reflashing the calculator will be of any help as I've never seen a SysRPL program damaging the flash. Just pressing the right key will make it work for you ==== I try all possible. The problem with my hp49g is: I can't use any key, I can't access any diagnostic mode, I also can't reboot, and I can't access download menu. I can't use any combination with [ON]. I just see the try to recover memory screen when I click [ON], and the only key that responds is the [ON]-key with a continuously bip bip bip ... as long as I press [ON]. I just see the small sablier, sand glass(that show that the calculator is doing something). I tried already to reset the HP49G on the back of the calculator(I thing more than 50 times). I try to remove the battery for more thant 12 hours(it's was a tip of the [ON]-key for more than 5 mn(Also a tip from Prof. Wolfgang Rautenberg), but I get nothing, only this bip. I really don't know what I should do. It's terrible that only because of a software problem I'm not more able to use my hp. I hope I will fix this problem(with any means necessary). I don't want to use my hp as a very cool paperweight(I read this joke in one of the answer). I am not able(it's a little bit expensiv for me) to get a brand new calculator. Regard. ==== hi Dimitri ! I have the same problem ! nothing works... BUT, i have TWO calcs in the same situation. Both death ! IĒve opened one of them, i need some information of how erase the flash manualy, and i mean, over the chip ! Luciano ==== I might be the first... Yesterday I was running bzDIR and accidentally pressed ON during the operation. The calculator went dead, and I had to use the hardware reset to get the HOME screen to appear. No keys worked except ON-combinations. I tried ON-A-F and got TTRM, but it ignored Yes and No. I tried rebooting with the backspace pressed and it made no difference. So I ran the ON-D diags and it said that there was a CRC failure in Bank 1. I reflashed the ROM and everything is now fine. Including the SysRPL version of bzDIR that seemed to cause it. Bill ==== Astonishment! This matches my previous message, J-1 and K-1 are both divisible by 2x, when x is such that J=7x^2 + 2x + 1 and K=7x^2 - 2x + 1 are primes. Thomas how did you find x=5220, was it just searching or something else? Good. Could this be proved for N=2x where x is such that J,K are primes? :-/ ==== Interesting, really! But what makes GCD(J-1,K-1) so different? ==== Rodger, what about x=1290. The HP49G says that then 7x^2+2x+3 and 7x^2-2x+3 are both primes. Is that false? ==== Seen: This provides a shorter proof, at last, of Fermat's Last Theorem :) Something similar is commonly used, however, to conclude that some integer is prime, which the HP49 will sometimes assert when it isn't so, because the abbreviated procedure only indicates a probable prime, much as you can get arrested for only a probable crime :) I believe that RSA public key generation also commonly tests for primes in only a probabilistic fashion, based on the extremely low probability of generating a bad key pair (it's possible that a bad pair won't actually work in practice, though, which if so would constitute a final positive test). More examples of highly probable but uncertain things: http://www.utm.edu/research/primes/notes/conjectures http://mathworld.wolfram.com/GoldbachConjecture.html But the following people are more certain than others: http://website.lineone.net/~pierz/maths.htm http://www.geocities.com/carryme47714 Is our NSA out scouting for future talent? http://www.nsa.gov/programs/mepp/ms/numthe02.pdf Breaking codes was easier when all it took to accomplish was a roomful of bright, attractive ladies with pencils: http://powell.ifrance.com/powell/sebastian.htm http://classicvideo.ch/FilmSheet.cfm?ID=8544 http://blockbuster.com/bb/movie/details/0,7286,VID-V++++43402,00.html Gielgud, Sutherland, Bogarde, York and Palmer all must have regretted signing on. The film's producer Herbert Brodkin, later commenting on producing TV dramas: They have reduced the audience's level of receptivity to a bunch of monkeys asking for the same peanuts. And they are the same organ grinders giving it to them. If that sounds extreme, it's not. It's true. http://www.bartleby.com/63/45/8445.html Brodkin also produced: Ralph Bellamy, William Shatner and Steve McQueen made the pilot. -[]- . ==== When x=1290, for 7x^2 + 2x + 3 I get 11651283 and for 7x^2 - 2x + 3 I get 11646123, neither of which is prime. Is this not what you get? Perhaps you were evaluating 7x^2 + 2x +1 and 7x^2 - 2x +1, which are the expressions Joe mentioned earlier. ==== Have you a specific example where the HP49 does this? I'm surprised that such an example is known. ==== Hey! Watch your language! ;-) http://www.bigwaste.com/shatner/ -Joe- ==== My count is 234 times, for x = : 22 23 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 38 40 41 42 43 44 46 48 51 52 53 54 57 59 60 61 62 64 65 66 67 69 73 78 79 80 81 82 85 86 87 89 100 101 102 106 107 108 110 112 121 123 125 127 128 131 133 135 140 144 145 147 148 152 154 155 158 159 161 173 175 176 178 179 181 182 188 192 196 199 200 213 217 234 235 238 239 244 245 249 250 255 256 260 266 270 271 276 279 287 291 292 293 297 308 310 313 319 326 329 334 340 345 348 354 355 357 359 363 375 380 383 384 386 391 393 396 403 407 410 412 418 424 428 431 432 433 443 445 448 453 466 481 491 497 503 504 506 518 522 525 538 539 542 543 546 561 564 567 570 578 579 582 583 592 614 649 655 667 676 678 680 688 694 696 709 710 719 725 726 731 743 744 746 748 755 756 757 764 765 767 770 771 784 789 794 802 803 810 814 815 819 820 824 825 836 857 863 872 876 877 878 889 893 897 909 915 928 933 937 948 950 958 966 974 976 979 983 986 999 1000 Scott -- Scott Hemphill hemphill@alumni.caltech.edu This isn't flying. This is falling, with style. -- Buzz Lightyear ==== http://groups.google.com/groups?&q=6830509209595831+group%3Acomp.sys.hp48&bt nG=Google+Search HPCC #1046 -- ==== It's not 480 primes; it's 480 *times* that *both* functions produce primes simultaneously. -Joe- ==== (a programming language developed primarily for number theory exploration) musta been a steaming pile of shatner. :-( -Joe- ==== By searching, however not on my HP. Is that against the rules? ;-) Thomas -- If you cannot convince them, confuse them. -- Harry S. Truman ==== I had to try too. 128 seconds - ISPRIME? must be really slow ;-) ==== For detailed discussion, see Mika Heiskanen's posts in this thread: (Mika implemented these commands) http://groups.google.com/groups?threadm=m4mwvsbq2g0.fsf%40delta.hut.fi . ==== Yes, you will be violently taken away from Glarus and brought in the darkest dungeons of Nidwalden, where you will spend your life waiting for an answer in front of your HP. ;-) On the other hand, considering that we don't have 3000000 years time for searching with the HP, we could declare working with other systems to be a rule. That is, just for finding something before we cross the river ;-) ==== Ahaaaaaa! Joe's polynomials were: and indeed these are those which I used. Are the following polynomials: your own discovery? ==== oops, that's what I meant.. and exactly the point I was getting at. Aaron ==== Well, (blush), yes. I think I used the same Joe used; fool around with the coefficients. But what about the question I asked. If, after n reaches 126 million or so, we haven't gotten a single prime pair, are we entitled to say that there will never be any? Technically, no, but how do you feel about it? ==== A couple months back, there was a news item saying that some number theorists in India had discovered a fast (polynomial time), deterministic primality testing algorithm. It was published in some scholarly journal, but the newsies felt that it was of interest to the general public. You can read about it at http://www.cse.iitk.ac.in/news/primality.html . The algorithm is simple enough, but I haven't gotten around to implementing it yet. If you guys beat me to implementation, I won't mind... :-) Lance ==)---------------- lrreiche@inav.your.pants.net Please remove your.pants. to contact me directly. ==== If you do a little checking, you find that any x that is odd gives results where both numbers are divisible by 2. Also, any x that is a multiple of 3 will mean that both numbers are divisible by 3. Lastly, for 7x^2+2x+3, for numbers x=4 MOD 6, we find the numbers are divisible by 3. AND: for 7x^2-2x+3, for numbers x=2 MOD 6, we also find that the numbers are divisible by 3. (the = sign should be a congruence sign). give a prime number. But, you're welcome to try it for as long as you wish to. John Edry ==== I had hoped that if I prodded long enough, I could get someone else interested. I can't do all the work, you know. :-) ==== so, we haven't be any? Since the first prime-generating n for some poly pairs is very large (in the thousands), I have a tickly feeling that reaching 126 million without finding one does NOT necessarily mean that there aren't any. I've yet to see a first n greater than 1E6, but methinks that's only because I haven't looked long enough. But... that's just a feeling, and I'd equally enjoy seeing it proved or disproved. -Joe- ==== However... You proved that this particular poly pair is prime-pair output-free by examining inputs mod 6. Some other poly pair might be a mod 12 situation, right? Or mod 210. Is there any way of reaching our goal without using trial and error on sets of inputs mod m? Or is there any way of determining what the modulus is without trial and error? -Joe- ==== Yes, I read about it a while back. It's pretty decent work ;-) ==== This new algorithm is not *fast*. It runs in polynomial time and provides a deterministic answer about the primality of a given number. There were already other such polynomial-time algorithms, but those didn't work for *any* number (only special cases ones). In crypto, we use good sub-exponential probabilistic non-primality tests (such as Fermat, or Rabin-Miller), which, when run enough times, provide a good primality test with a definable risk of being wrong. Theoritically speaking, the algorithm you're talking about is a great enhancement, it proves that the primality test is a P-class problem. Unfortunately, the proposed algorithm runs in O((log n)^12), where n is the number to test. This is too slow to be practical. In practice, it can't compete with a good Rabin-Miller that runs in time O((log n)^5). The Rabin-Miller must be run a number of times to minimize the risks of letting a composite pass the test, but this number of times is a small one (5 or 6), and it decreases when n grows. -- ----- AD: Tous les outils et mat.8eriels existent, ce n'est pas on.8ereux de plus. AD: Monte ton serveur et tu pourras faire ce que bon te chantes. DP: Et la libert.8e Mr le censeur??? tu en fais quoi??? -+- In : Guide du Neuneu d'Usenet - Bien chier sur la moquette -+- ==== -snipped rest-- It is always dangerous to make general statements out of particular events, though of course what one feels always plays some role. In this case, well, I really don't know. ==== need to search anymore. ==== That's not true, isn it? You still get incredible amounts of prime numbers even when searcing through arbitrarily big numbers. miz. ==== Do u know a soft who determinate if a number is prime or not. For hp48. ==== Alg48 and Erable, but if you need something smaller look for it in hpcalc.org ==== WHILE 'divider