Math Is Fun Forum

First of all, it will in general take an infinite number of steps to find the other robot due to their relative distance at the beginning being close to infinite.

If the axis has numerical values on it, the algorithm could say to approach zero and wait there for the other robot.   I doubt based on what you said that the value can be obtained, so their is no built in compass.

Next option I believe is to oscillate while leaving a trail of flags and continue
to oscillate larger and larger perhaps exponentially larger oscillations would be
a good choice, I'm not sure.
Then if a robot finds a flag of the other robot, that robot will continue in its
current direction forever looking for the robot.  The other robot has the
same algorithm, so if it finds a flag it continues that direction toward the
other robot.  That's about all I can say I've thought about this.

Nice!  Did you make those up yourself?

Yes, but infintesimal is possibly BETWEEN zero and greater than zero.
I'm just pulling your leg

Can you point me to a link to read more about this subject?
I feel kind of dumb looking at this.

Ricky, I think just because you prove something is not greater or less than zero, doesn't prove it is zero.   Because infintesimal might be between zero and greater than zero.

That's what I was thinking, thanks for the pictures.
How come in the pictures, above the light blue surfaces,
there are only four lines, not five eminating from a center.
Probably just a small error.   Really cool though!

Oh yes, an amplitude of 2 which is a sine wave that varies from 2 to -2 in its height.
The two will square to 4, and the negative part of the wave will become positive, so the amplitude will be 2 again because it varies from 0 to 4 now, instead of -2 to 2.

Also the equation cannot be written down without ellipsis (...) in it.  Or you could write a summation.
But the number of terms changes with x, so the equation keeps changing, plus for negative x or fractional x's,
how many terms are there?

No, the number wasn't eighty, that's where I got mixed up counting in French.  The number was possibly over a hundred.
It is usually 1.4 times too many rotations, not the other way around.

Also I did some counting at various speeds of orbit, and the number of rotations is too high by the √ 2 sorry to say.
Am I being too picky?  Par example, I counted a quarter of a year at 365 days per year to practice counting en français, and I got mixed up between 79 and 80 where the numbers are funny in French, but I also counted out some shorter years and got more turns than expected.