Notably every 3 degrees, which works out to pi/60. So their trig table, which I’m guessing counted in terms of pi/60 radians would only have real radicals.

But I’m not sure how this could be any more accurate than a table that just shows values for every 3 degrees. We happen to prefer five degrees probably, but I could duplicate their “completely accurate” table by judicious selection of table entries.

“…but a series of trigonometry tables which scientists claim are more accurate than any available today.”

consider me skeptical.

https://www.livescience.com/60227-babylonian-clay-tablet-trigonometry.html

See above for less hype-driven treatment.

ok, so it’s possible to calculate exact sin and cos for some angles. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trigonometric_constants_expressed_in_real_radicals

Notably every 3 degrees, which works out to pi/60. So their trig table, which I’m guessing counted in terms of pi/60 radians would only have real radicals.

But I’m not sure how this could be any more accurate than a table that just shows values for every 3 degrees. We happen to prefer five degrees probably, but I could duplicate their “completely accurate” table by judicious selection of table entries.

Base 60, 3000 years ago!

I think you mean 50 years ago. :)

Close, it’s 50:0, not 5:0.