## Discuss Scratch

Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

I didn't test it for non-integers; I'm a theoretical mathematician, not a practical mathematician.
Also, I'm sure that my longer version would work for anything.
You should test it. (TBH, though, it doesn't take that much thought to realise that it can't work – if you enter two numbers that are <=1, such as 1 and 0.01, then the “mod” operator can't give anything larger than what you put in – i.e. you certainly can't get an integer >1, which is what you want…)

If you think about it, yours is restricted because it only works with real numbers, unlike mine.

Yup, that's the best way to make it general – create a fully complex-compatible version.

If the user is expecting to work only with real numbers, though, then you'll have to look at the imaginary part and decide if it's ‘close enough’ to zero to return an ‘allowed’ (i.e. real) answer rather than “NaN”…

Last edited by DadOfMrLog (Jan. 2, 2017 00:11:29)

Alternate account: TheLogFather –– HowTos and useful custom blocks (see studio). Examples below…

- String manipulation - - - X to power of Y - - - Clone point to clone - Detect New Scratcher - Speed tests studio -

dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

I didn't test it for non-integers; I'm a theoretical mathematician, not a practical mathematician.
Also, I'm sure that my longer version would work for anything.
You should test it. (TBH, though, it doesn't take that much thought to realise that it can't work – if you enter two numbers that are <=1, such as 1 and 0.01, then the “mod” operator can't give anything larger than what you put in – i.e. you certainly can't get an integer >1, which is what you want…)
No because it returns the reciprocal of the denominator, which is less than one if the denominator is greater than one.

If you think about it, yours is restricted because it only works with real numbers, unlike mine.

Yup, that's the best way to make it general – create a fully complex-compatible version.

If the user is expecting to work only with real numbers, though, then you'll have to look at the imaginary part and decide if it's ‘close enough’ to zero to return an ‘allowed’ (i.e. real) answer rather than “NaN”…

Users can just enter 0 for the imaginary parts.

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

No because it returns the reciprocal of the denominator, which is less than one if the denominator is greater than one.
Ah! I see what you're intending to do there now.

Yes, that has the right theory (assuming there is a rational representation). In practice I expect you'll start running into rounding error issues once the values of numerator and denominator become larger than a few hundred or so.

Besides, once the numerator or denominator gets too large, it'll likely overflow or underflow when you try to perform the power calculation by raising to the numerator power, or underflow by trying to take the denominator root.

Anyway, here's my attempt to find a fairly simple rational representation, based on your earlier script:
`define Find fraction for (x)if <((x) mod (1)) = [0]> then // check if it's already an integerset [Denominator v] to [1]set [Numerator v] to (x)stop [this script v]endif <(x)<[0]> then // deal with negative case...Find fraction for (()-(x)) // ...by finding positive fraction instead...set [Numerator v] to (() - (Numerator)) // ...and negating top of itstop [this script v]endset [tol v] to ((x)*(1e-10)) // tolerance for checking if fraction is (near enough) correctset [a v] to [1]set [b v] to ((x) mod (1)) // start with fractional part of xforever // hopefully will get stopped by tests below...set [a v] to ( (a) mod (b) )set [Denominator v] to (round ((1)/(b)))set [Numerator v] to (round ((x)/(b)))if <([abs v] of ( (x)-((Numerator)/(Denominator)) )) < (tol)> thenstop [this script v] // the test above seemed to be the most effective way to check we have what we wantendset [b v] to ( (b) mod (a) )set [Denominator v] to (round ((1)/(a)))set [Numerator v] to (round ((x)/(a)))if <([abs v] of ( (x)-((Numerator)/(Denominator)) )) < (tol)> thenstop [this script v]endend`

Above works quite nicely for many reasonably simple fractions. But rounding errors cause problems once the rational representation starts to have larger values on top and/or bottom.

Users can just enter 0 for the imaginary parts.
No, I mean for the result, not the operands. I'm thinking of a custom block that only deals with reals here – and it only gives a non-NaN result if the answer is also real(ish).

(In practice, many Scratchers would not have much idea about complex numbers, and would simply want a custom block that has two slots, for two variables/expressions, and so those would be real-valued and they would expect it to give back a real value, if possible.)

Last edited by DadOfMrLog (Jan. 2, 2017 10:46:50)

Alternate account: TheLogFather –– HowTos and useful custom blocks (see studio). Examples below…

- String manipulation - - - X to power of Y - - - Clone point to clone - Detect New Scratcher - Speed tests studio -

dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

No because it returns the reciprocal of the denominator, which is less than one if the denominator is greater than one.
Ah! I see what you're intending to do there now.

Yes, that has the right theory (assuming there is a rational representation). In practice I expect you'll start running into rounding error issues once the values of numerator and denominator become larger than a few hundred or so.

Besides, once the numerator or denominator gets too large, it'll likely overflow or underflow when you try to perform the power calculation by raising to the numerator power, or underflow by trying to take the denominator root.

Anyway, here's my attempt to find a fairly simple rational representation, based on your earlier script:
`define Find fraction for (x)if <((x) mod (1)) = [0]> then // check if it's already an integerset [Denominator v] to [1]set [Numerator v] to (x)stop [this script v]endif <(x)<[0]> then // deal with negative case...Find fraction for (()-(x)) // ...by finding positive fraction instead...set [Numerator v] to (() - (Numerator)) // ...and negating top of itstop [this script v]endset [tol v] to ((x)*(1e-10)) // tolerance for checking if fraction is (near enough) correctset [a v] to [1]set [b v] to ((x) mod (1)) // start with fractional part of xforever // hopefully will get stopped by tests below...set [a v] to ( (a) mod (b) )set [Denominator v] to (round ((1)/(b)))set [Numerator v] to (round ((x)/(b)))if <([abs v] of ( (x)-((Numerator)/(Denominator)) )) < (tol)> thenstop [this script v] // the test above seemed to be the most effective way to check we have what we wantendset [b v] to ( (b) mod (a) )set [Denominator v] to (round ((1)/(a)))set [Numerator v] to (round ((x)/(a)))if <([abs v] of ( (x)-((Numerator)/(Denominator)) )) < (tol)> thenstop [this script v]endend`

Above works quite nicely for many reasonably simple fractions. But rounding errors cause problems once the rational representation starts to have larger values on top and/or bottom.

Users can just enter 0 for the imaginary parts.
No, I mean for the result, not the operands. I'm thinking of a custom block that only deals with reals here – and it only gives a non-NaN result if the answer is also real(ish).

(In practice, many Scratchers would not have much idea about complex numbers, and would simply want a custom block that has two slots, for two variables/expressions, and so those would be real-valued and they would expect it to give back a real value, if possible.)

You do realize that rational representation is only a way to get to exponential representation. There are others.

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

Sigton
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

^
Maybe you could move the discussion about imaginary numbers off of this topic since it's getting a bit off-topic now?

Sigton

dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

Sigton wrote:

^
Maybe you could move the discussion about imaginary numbers off of this topic since it's getting a bit off-topic now?

Sigton
This discussion is about powers. I was talking about powers of imaginary numbers. If you feel that what I was talking about was off-topic, then feel free to report this conversation for being off-topic, but I doubt that Paddle2See will agree with you (He seems to be the most active moderator on the forums.).

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

PkmnQ
Scratcher
100+ posts

### Power block

scratchisthebest wrote:

by this logic, we can remove “move (10) steps”

why not just use
`go to x: ((x position) + ([cos v] of ((direction)*(amt)))) y ((x position) + ([sin v] of ((direction)*(amt))))`
i mean jeez so simple
how is that simple?
you should've used
`change x by ()`
as the easy workaround block.

Last edited by PkmnQ (May 27, 2017 09:05:54)

Check out a sorting algorithm I discovered at school!
Or maybe, you can also check this odd vector detector.
DIAMOND_77
Scratcher
15 posts

### Power block

there is a work around
DIAMOND_77
Scratcher
15 posts

### Power block

if you want to say do 3^3 you just do this: ((3)*(3) *(3)) just put an operator in an operator!
DIAMOND_77
Scratcher
15 posts

see ya
stickfiregames
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

DIAMOND_77 wrote:

there is a work around
So how would you do 4 ^ 1.5 with that workaround? I think you'll find you can't.

If you can read this, my signature cubeupload has been eaten by an evil kumquat!

or you just used Inspect Element, you hacker

;
dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

DIAMOND_77 wrote:

if you want to say do 3^3 you just do this: ((3)*(3) *(3)) just put an operator in an operator!
But what if the power is variable? Like
`((2) ^ (number of lives left)    ::operators reporter)`
? One could use a repeat block, but that wouldn't work for non-integer exponents, like
`((2) ^ (batting average)    ::operators reporter)`
.

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

Charles12310
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

Workaround:

`define find (base)^(power)set [number v] to (base)repeat (([abs v] of (power)) - (1))set [number v] to ((number) * (base))endif <(power) < (0)> thenset [number v] to ((1)/(number))end`

Alternatives:

`([10^ v] of ((power) * ([log v] of (base))) :: operators )([e^ v] of ((power) * ([ln v] of (base))) :: operators )`

Last edited by Charles12310 (July 23, 2017 03:54:23)

A few internet communication companies want to corrupt the internet by getting rid of net neutrality. Stop Them!
dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

Charles12310 wrote:

Workaround:

`define find (base)^(power)set [number v] to (base)repeat ([abs v] of (power))set [number v] to ((number) * (base))endif <(power) < (0)> thenset [number v] to ((1)/(number))end`

Alternatives:

`([10^ v] of ((power) * ([log v] of (base))) :: operators )([e^ v] of ((power) * ([ln v] of (base))) :: operators )`
The first only works with integer powers.
The second only works with real numbers and gets inaccurate with small values.

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

Jonathan50
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

The second only works with real numbers and gets inaccurate with small values.
Scratch doesn't support imaginary numbers so it doesn't matter…
dvargasews
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

Jonathan50 wrote:

dvargasews wrote:

The second only works with real numbers and gets inaccurate with small values.
Scratch doesn't support imaginary numbers so it doesn't matter…
First of all, not directly…
Second, even though most Scratch members don't use imaginary numbers, they're still good for stuff like projecting 4D objects and quantum wave simulators.
Third, you still haven't addressed the part about how it gets inaccurate when working with really small numbers.

Please read my signature! It might explain some lingo that I used in my post or comment. However, not all of it shows, so you have to highlight the entire bottom of the post, from “Please read my signature!” to where it says report, and copy and paste in into a new sheet or tab or whatever.
I can't decide my signature between:
1. I'm a grammar stickler, and my pet peeve is when people use good as an adverb.
2. I have lots of [creativity]original ideas[/creativity]. [creativity]This[/creativity] is one of those ideas.
3. If I used this symbol: ⸮ in my comment, please look it up before doing anything else.
4. {Minot, North Dakota/Donald Trump parodies} “WE'RE GONNA BUILD A DAM AND MAKE CANADA PAY FOR IT!” “When Canada sends its water, they’re not sending their best drinking water…They’re bringing sleet. They’re bringing floods. The water's toxic.” (It's just a joke that I came up with.)
5. One should make his/her signature text small; that way (s)he can cram more text into the signature.
6. New [scratchblocks] idea each week! (Thanks to Bright-Idea (Read her signature.) for inspiration/the general idea.) Here's the archive:
Note: I stopped this because of signature character limits.
Week of 1-23-2017: Hat-caps tinyurl.com/htauyu2
Week of 1-16-2017: Country-colored scratchblocks tinyurl.com/z8lz6c4
Week of 1-9-2017: Drop-down booleans tinyurl.com/j5d3k6l
Week of 1-2-2017: Block->string inputs and more truth values tinyurl.com/jqu7avs

Jonathan50
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

dvargasews wrote:

First of all, not directly…
I know you can use them in Scratch but Scratch still doesn't support them.
Second, even though most Scratch members don't use imaginary numbers, they're still good for stuff like projecting 4D objects and quantum wave simulators.
Scratch doesn't support imaginary numbers, so they're a user data type and none of the primitive operations do or can be expected to work on them anyways
Third, you still haven't addressed the part about how it gets inaccurate when working with really small numbers.
Yes, because that's an actual problem with the workaround and I didn't mean to address it.
CodeBit
Scratcher
70 posts

### Power block

I have been trying to graph functions with a project, and it appears that an object cannot move in a curve if moving towards the left. It only follows the instructions if the x position is greater than 0, but Scratch's left side of the screen has a negative x coordinate. Can anybody solve this? I have used the way using logarithms…

Currently the script can draw a curve this way:

`when green flag clickedforeverchange x by (1)set [ base ] to (x position)set [ power ] to [ 2 ]set y to ((0.01) * ([ e^ v] of ((power) * [ ln v] of (base)))pen downend`

Last edited by CodeBit (Dec. 23, 2017 03:12:27)

- CodeBit
Charles12310
Scratcher
1000+ posts

### Power block

I really think this idea would be very useful!

No, there is a workaround.

`([10^ v] of ((power) * ([log v] of (number))) :: operators )`

Enough said.
1. This workaround doesn't work with negative numbers. Adding a script to return the result for negative numbers adds more complexity to workarounds.
2. Logarithms are mostly taught starting at either the end of Middle school or at the beginning of secondary school.

A few internet communication companies want to corrupt the internet by getting rid of net neutrality. Stop Them!
walkcycle
Scratcher
500+ posts

### Power block

CodeBit wrote:

Scratch's left side of the screen has a negative x coordinate. Can anybody solve this?
the abs operator makes a negative value positive

try

`set [base v] to ([abs v] of (x position))`

Help With Scripts for more problems (this is the suggestions forum)