32 bit or 64 bit?

[ram.rachum at gmail.com]

On Jun 15, 7:43 pm, Peter Otten <__pete... at web.de> wrote:
> ram.rac... at gmail.com wrote:
> > On Jun 15, 6:58 pm, Christian Meesters <meest... at uni-mainz.de> wrote:
> >> > I do need speed. Is there an option?
>
> >> Mind telling us what you *actually* want to achieve? (What do you want to
> >> calculate?)
>
> >> Christian
>
> > Physical simulations of objects with near-lightspeed velocity.
>
> How did you determine that standard python floats are not good enough?

I have a physical system set up in which a body is supposed to
accelerate and to get very close to lightspeed, while never really
attaining it. After approx. 680 seconds, Python gets stuck and tells
me the object has passed lightspeed. I put the same equations in
Mathematica, again I get the same mistake around 680 seconds. So I
think, I have a problem with my model! Then I pump up the
WorkingPrecision in Mathematica to about 10. I run the same equations
again, and it works! At least for the first 10,000 seconds, the object
does not pass lightspeed.
I concluded that I need Python to work at a higher precision.

> Everything beyond that is unlikely to be supported by the hardware and will
> therefore introduce a speed penalty.
>

I have thought of that as well. However I have no choice. I must do
these calculations. If you know of any way that is supported by the
hardware, it will be terrific, but for now the slower things will have
to do.



> Did you try gmpy?

Not yet: I was kind of set back when I saw their homepage was last
updated 2002. But I'll give it a try. You think it's the best thing
there is?

Thanks,
Ram.