Finally I am successful in calculating pi value — less than 0.3% error, by using random number generation. Although my computer needs some fixation on its compiler or path definition etc, there are very good online compilers which helps in testing and running c++ codes: try the given link.
Computing the value of pi using std::rand()
Enter number of trials: 10000
Enter number of random (x,y) points per trial: 10
pi = 3.14376 +- 0.00519107
average – exact = 0.00216735
CPU time = 0.004027 secs
Here is the code I found by searching a good deal on the web. Yes I did tinker around but only because my own compiler (Turbo C++ on windows 10, 64 bits) was throwing some exceptions on the included headers.
using namespace std;
Why information is more and more viral, if its got more statistics? Because it sits on more and more number of servers which are being accessed in a randomized fashion there is increase in the statistics and thus possible viral tendencies.
When you are reading an article on a large computer system, lets say a NY times article another person isn’t accessing the same servers, given a particular server can be accessed lest say by only 100 people. Thus NY times has to buy more number of computer servers and more bandwidth etc.
It reflects the quality scope of the citations. Its the total percentage of a citation that goes into defining a particular citation index. Let me call it q-index therefore (q for quality)
See this example.
My h-ind is 60. So total (minimum) citation it accounts for is 60*60 = 3600. My total citation is 12215. So my q-ind is 3600/12215 = 29.47% Or 29.47% of my total citation were important for this parameter. Hence my q-index is 29.47. In this way if someone has 500 total citation with h-index 60, he has a much better q-index than mine, because more of his paper are highly cited
2. The object can be a large object, eg say something whose picture you are taking. But as explained above its not the energy of the object (or momentum) which is directly coming into the problem. That would be an added degree of concern if the object is moving with certain velocity, a reason why pictures are blurred. Because motion of objects introduces additional energy-time-momentum-position variables and their corresponding uncertainties. For the argument of the above problem one can imagine the large sized object, lets say a bird, is standing still on a tree while its picture is being taken. In that case if the wavelength of the light [few 100 nano meters = 1/10th of a micrometer] is used (eg in a digital-camera) the corresponding accuracy of the light will be less than micrometers. You can take a very sharp picture of the bird, which is lets say 6 inch long. But when you zoom in to a large degree, the inaccuracies will show up. [in this case how to see a micrometer level image? Is a computer sufficient to show us the uncertain edges of the pixels?] If the wavelength (here visible light) is so small, evidently by de-Broglie relationship, momentum or energy of such light is very large. But its not as large to disturb the feelings of the bird. The bird doesn’t have a problem with visible light, and such energy does not disturb its position or energy or any thing so to say. So while Quantum Mechanics is valid, we are accustomed to say this is a classical mechanics situation. To say QM is invalid is incorrect. To say QM is understood to be valid is a knowledgeable position.