Yes, 355÷113 is very close to π, but is not equal to π
So how does it get things 'right' for cos(355÷113), but not right for sin(355÷113)?
And why is the error of π-355÷113 exactly the same as the error of sin(355÷113)?
I sense some fuckiness of how they handle π...
That comes down to the calculator using radians while you're expecting degrees: cos(0°) = 1, and cos(355/113 degrees) = 0.99849714986386383364. The default for most calculators is to do trig functions in radians, and there we have cos(0) = 1 and cos(π) = -1. π degrees is much closer to 0° than 180° (which is equivalent to π radians), hence the answer for that being almost 1.
The OPTN button near the SHIFT button will probably let you swap between RADians and DEGrees
Oh hell, alrighty then! Sure enough my old QBasic 3D graphics engine from 1998 was working in radians!
Holy hell I forgot about that, it's been about 27 years since I actually looked at my first rendering engine!
I'll see myself out now, but thank you for the refresher! 👍
I almost guarantee you all my calculators are configured for degrees for these tests. I edited my comment after testing 4 different calculators.
Now I just don't know why two of them give me -1 and the other two give me +1.
Edit: I may have to learn more about this Casio, but still I'm getting conflicting results between other calculators, including modern Linux Calculator.
The correct answer in degrees is cos(pi) = 0.99849714986386383364. The correct answer in radians is cos(pi) = -1 (exactly). Any calculator giving you cos(pi) = -1 is definitely in radians mode - and if you mean you're getting cos(pi) = exactly 1, and not 0.998, then that should never happen in any mode, unless it just has two digits of accuracy. Which I doubt any calculator with a 'cos' button has ever had.
For the record, if using sine, you should have sin(pi) = 0.05480366514878953089 if in degrees mode, or sin(pi) = 0 (exactly) if in radians mode.