Calculator Thread

I have TI 84 plus and I can't imagine needing to upgrade.
I have seen people with fancy calculators that can do almost anything except maybe sing and dance.
All I've ever used it for is graphing and checking sine values. To be honest I don't even know a fraction of what this calculator can probably do.
I'm physics 3rd yeat btw.

>>7724036
Do you know the names of the fancy calculators others had? The TI 84 Plus is programmable as it has BASIC in it. I write programs for conics, matrices, solving quadratic formulas with complex solutions, etc. Writing them helps imprint the processes and formulas into my memory so I can recall them quite quickly and accurately whenever needed.

>>7724041
Sorry, can't help you with the names.

What can I say? I am an old-fashioned pen and paper man.
Whenever I need a numerical solution, I use Octave. It seems like an awful hassle to program the TI84+. I've never even looked into BASIC programming so I can't tell if you're onto something with using the calculator for that.
Can you by chance compare Octave/Matlab to using a calculator? I'm now genuinely curious as to whether it is worth the pain of getting used to the keyboard on the calculator and to learn basic.

HP 50g man

>>7724041
Get a ti89 titanium
The Nspire is crap.
Owned both, Nspire is a toy.

3rd year in physics and i never could/needed to use a graphic calculator (not alowed in most exams cause of cheating). My ti84 from high school is just gathering dust...

>>7724050
Programming on the TI 84 Plus isn't too difficult, I taught myself. I just started with simple programs, such as this one that calculates the determinant of a 2x2 matrix and tells you what it is. I used it in high school when teachers would knock you down to a B+ for simple transcription errors when you were clearly an A level student.
:Prompt A, B, C, D
:AD-BC -> (this arrow is the 'STO' button as in store) X
:Disp X

From there you can do other things. This is another program I made in high school physics when we were working with trebuchets. It calculates the theoretical maximum range given a few variables.
:Disp "C=COUNTERWEIGHT MASS"
:Prompt C
:Disp "H=CHANGE IN HEIGHT"
:Prompt H
:Disp "A=ACCELERATION DUE TO GRAV."
:Prompt A
:C*H*A -> G
:Disp "GPE STORED IN COUNTERWEIGHT IS", G
:Disp "E=EFFICIENCY OF ENERGY TRANSFER"
:Prompt E
:G*E -> K
:Disp "KE OF PROJECTILE IS",K
:Disp "P=MASS OF PROJECTILE"
:Prompt P
:sqrt(2K/P) -> V
:Disp "VELOCITY OF PROJECTILE IS",V
:Disp "ASSUME TRAJECTORY IS 45 DEGREES TO THE HORIZONTAL"
:cos(45)*V -> X
:sin(45)*V -> Y
:Disp "VELOCITY FORWARDS IS",X
:Disp "VELOCITY UPWARDS IS",Y
:2Y/A -> T
:Disp "FLIGHT TIME IS",T
:T*X -> D
:Disp "MAXIMUM THEORETICAL DISTANCE IS", D

(Note that I don't actually have this program anymore so the executed program might be a little off but it'd be damn close).

>>7724076
I have a Casio fx 82 PLUS II for exams and it's pretty damn good.

>>7724024

Graphing calculators are pointless in the year of our Lord Jesus Christ 11111011111. Get a scientific like the FX115es+ and use Matlab/Maple for HW and self study.

I bought a TI86 instead of 83 Plus cause I thought I would need it for uni level stuff. I haven't used it for anything it does that a TI83Plus doesn't and all my professors use 83's and 84's

>>7724075
Doesn't TI84+ BASIC need the line numbers, as normal BASIC needs?

>>7724024
I have pic related, and really fucking hate it.

Favorite calculators have been a ti-89, and some casio that will compute sums and definite integrals. I think the best combo would be to spend a bit of money on a student copy of mathematica or matlab, and then a few bucks on that Casio.

Honestly, the only time I ever use a graphing calculator, is in exams.

>>7724097
>spend a bit of money on a student copy of mathematica or matlab

Or get it for free...

https://kat.cr/mathworks-matlab-r2015a-64-bit-firstuploads-t10359507.html
https://kat.cr/maplesoft-maple-2015-64bit-crack-t10497789.html
http://winpython.github.io/

>>7724024
>>7724024
you americans suck with your fancy calculators...
the best calculator we were allowed to use in school and uni is a Casio FX-991DE Plus here in germany

>>7724024
>>7724101
>>7724149
Nobody in a STEM degree EVER needs a graphing calculator for a single class.

Anything computations on tests are designed to be done in your head (where only order of magnitude matters) or with a scientific calculator (differential equations, physics 1,2,3)

Any homework,projects,research you will do, you will be coding to model and solve your equations. Pick a language like C++ or Python or Latex even and learn how to use it to generate graphs and solve equations.

>>7724149
>Casio FX-991DE Plus

The same calculator is called 115es in the states

>>7724154
I'm the guy who suggested matlab. I have a lot of love for using python for this sort of thing. Before I got a copy of matlab through the university, I used to use python for plotting and image processing, and have used it in a couple of projects. I've also used C++ for similar things in the past.

But since getting my hands on matlab and mathematica, I almost never use python. I'm 100% convinced that anything you can do with matlab, you can do just as well with python, and there's no denying that python, as a language, blows matlab out of the water.

That said though, i'm also convinced that matlab is a lot more convenient to use for generating plots and basic signal/image processing tasks. For a lot of things, the convenience is marginal: having to import and call routines from libraries like numpy or scipy for basic number crunching needs requires a few extra keystrokes here and there, but isn't really that big a deal. On the other hand, generating 3D plots with matplotlib is a huge pain in the ass versus doing it with matlab. Having to call numpy routines for matrix arithmetic is fairly annoying too.

The symbolic capabilities of matlab and mathematica also blow sympy out of the water. I've seen sympy shit itself on certain fourier and laplace transforms that don't give matlab or mathematica any problems, and sympy is basically incapable (last I checked) of integrating piecewise functions.

>>7724024
>However this is more for self-study and improving my understanding of the concepts and ideas by playing around with them on a good calculator.

I don't think a calculator is going to do anything to aid you here. In my undergrad, I got to use a calculator fora approximately three classes (all physics) and that had to be scientific. The fact is, you won't get any use out of it. Plugging numbers into a calculator isn't going to help you improve your understanding of any objects in math.

>>7724024
Currently in year 13 (UK) doing Maths, Further Maths and Physics with a Ti-84 Plus.

Considering upgrading to the Ti-84 Plus CE, mainly for the higher res screen and just general improvements to the device as a whole.

As much as I'm not even at degree level, it seems to be the case for me as with other people in the thread that the advantages a graphic calculator has over a standard scientific calculator don't tend to be useful for Physics, only really for pure maths since most of what you're doing in Physics is plugging in numbers.

File: click.jpg (26KB, 471x371px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 471x371px

>>7724024
>Any other recommendations or words of wisdom?
I'll just save my time and copypasta my opinion on calculators.

"I use a Casio fx83GT PLUS and a TI-Nspire CX CAS. I wish I never bought the later, by the time it would take for me to learn how to use it, or program on it, I could've just fucking learned maths. Aside from that, it's simply a fact that computers make programmable calculators redundant, you're honestly better off putting some good aps on your phone or learning how to use Wolfram Alpha than you are buying a TI-Nspire, aside from the time and money saved, Wolfram is probably better than the Nspire anyway, for example, I don't know anyway to tell the Nspire to give me equivalent forms of shit, but if I just type something like x^3+9x+5, Wolfram will probably give me 6 different forms of it. Heck, to make matters worse, calculators seem to lie more, and more harshly than computers (go read a basic calculus textbook, it'll give you the warnings)

Maybe I'll change my opinion on that once I'm in the latter years of my (maths) degree course and have found more use in the downloadable shit for the calculator, but otherwise I'm better served by just my head and my Casio fx83GT PLUS.

That being said however, if I was to recommend a calculator for someone who's not restricted by exams or money, I'd probably recommend a different Casio, but I don't know which, stuff like the Prism probably has the same issues as the Nspire, so I'd probably just recommend the best non-programmable ones, I mean those blue/white things that do graphing and shit, pic related. When I was trying to pick what calculator to buy, I was stuck between pic related, the Prism, the Nspire and the FX-9860GII. (You have no idea how much time that sentence will save you if you're looking to buy the best calculator)
cont

>>7724238
>>7724024
So... for anyone wanting my opinion on calculators:
The Casio FX-991ESPLUS Scientific Calculator is basically the best possible Casio fx83GT PLUS.
If memory serves, the Casio FX-9860GII Graphics Calculator SD is basically a step up from the FX-991 but a step down from the Prism, so I don't see why you'd ever buy it but I suppose it does look more familiar than the Prism.
The Casio FX-CG20, Prism, or whatever the fuck you want to call it is Casio's best, but whenever I looked into things, to me it seemed inferior to the Nspire, so I bought an Nspire, which brings me back to the original post (btw, there's no point in debating which TI is best, the only real downside of the Nspire is that it's not as hackable as the older models, but for that you can just stick to an older version of the software, which can be hacked).


So to summarise:
If you're restricted by exams, get the best calculator you're allowed.
If you're not restricted by exams go for the Casio FX-991ESPLUS Scientific Calculator and just use Wolfram or your favourite computer algebra system (e.g. Maple) for anything it doesn't do.
If you're not restricted by exams and feel like you need to own a programmable calculator, then be an idiot like me and get the Nspire (but I don't know why you would... but if you do then make sure to hack Final Fantasy onto it for some extra fun)

There's also the HP Prime, but I don't see why you'd buy it when the Nspire and Prism exist."

>>7724036
Well it can't suck your dick, I can tell you that much.

>>7724024
I got this for an economics course that would have otherwise forced me to do shit like guess solutions to high-degree polynomials and do linear interpolations between values in a look-up table, and do other kinds of wonky procedures that only serve to make the class seem more difficult than it is, and I've got to say it's pretty nice.

Programming in TI-Basic is kind of a pain in the ass and I haven't really bothered to look into the Lua scripting capabilities because it can't (as far as I can tell) be used in the normal workspaces of the calculator (so I can't really use the TI functions along with the Lua functions) but other than that it really saved my ass in a few places.

One of the good things is that TI gives you their emulator/editor if you register with them so you can do all of your programming and debugging on your desktop computer and just move the files over to your device.

I just hope I'll have other professors that don't give a shit if I use it.

I use a ti-84, but ti-89 is pretty much objectively better. In my college all our stem classes basically require a powerful calculator since we aren't given easily worked equations and solutions like sin(pi/2) or something. We are generally given realistic engineering problems even in low level calc/physics that wouldn't be possible without a calculator.

>>7724024
>However this is more for self-study and improving my understanding of the concepts and ideas by playing around with them on a good calculator

People do do that in university but with actual programming languages. Using a calculator in this day and age of cheap and ubiquitous PCs/laptops is just retarded.

>>7724233
>only really for pure maths

You don't have a clue what you're talking about.

>>7724239
Why would you restrict yourself to a scientific if exams don't restrict you?

Graphing calculators are basically a free A, I think it's crazy to allow them. But if you're trying to optimize your grade you'd be nuts not too. Sadly most STEM degrees just require the right calculator :/

Wow this thread tells me a lot about the board demographics. Common practice in my EE department is people will put giant libraries of worked out old test problems from the school website, MIT OCW, chegg, etc and during the test try to find a similar one.

A good calculator beats any test unless your test is truly an original piece of work, which is highly unlikely in undergrad. Somewhere someone has uploaded a solution to a similar problem, just a matter of prepping your calculator.

>>7724096
I never saw numbers in the programming lines, just colons. I never actually used BASIC anywhere except on the TI84 Plus so I can't compare the versions myself.

>>7725717
>Why would you restrict yourself to a scientific if exams don't restrict you?
I'd consider anything beyond a scientific a waste of money.

>Graphing calculators are basically a free A
If that's honest the case, then fair enough and I'll change the post for future copypastaing but honestly if graphing calculators are a free A, then there's something fucked up with your exams.

>>7725730
Lol in the time it takes to do that you could actually just learn the material. And how much time are they giving you to take your exams that you can spend time searching through a huge library to find a similar problem? In my experience our exams are timed so that you barely even have time to figure out problems you don't know, just writing out the math alone usually takes up 95% of the exam's time.

>>7724149
>implying I'm american
I'm Australia, cunt.

>>7724024
The CX CAS is pretty good. It is recommendable.
I like how it's interface is a bit like a computer, which makes it easy to navigate and also makes it obsolete to write things in parentheses, when dividing stuff (which can easily make an expression look overwhelming imo).
Also it has all the tools that a CAS tool should have. That must count for something!

>>7725988
I'd have to agree. If your exams/tests allow it, then nspire/89 or go home.

>>7726902
I wish
https://www.uq.edu.au/myadvisor/docs/exams/approved-calculators.pdf

ti 89 plat is the best calc out

>>7725978
Both are loud annoying English speakers.