PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 10 Pi ? wouldn't it be 20 pi, as the formula is 2(pi)r Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It is pervasive throughout all my conversations on this subject. Let's try this...... What is the circumference of a circle whos radius is 10? Tell me what number you use for pi. What's the decimal for 2/3? How long does that number go on until it is EXACTLY 2/3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 What's the decimal for 2/3? How long does that number go on until it is EXACTLY 2/3? that was my next question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It is pervasive throughout all my conversations on this subject. That's the thing...I think its apparent to only yourself that you've answered this question...but you haven't. Let's try this......What is the circumference of a circle whos radius is 10? Tell me what number you use for pi. Again, this proves nothing. What does pi have to do with the concept of infinity? Pi is one of many numbers that goes on forever...2/3 goes on forever as well...what value do you use for that?!? If you would actually test your own questions, you would see that the difference between using a value of 3.14 and 3.14......to the 100th digit is miniscule, maybe on the order of 0.01% difference. That is an entirely different mathematical concept than infinity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 What's the decimal for 2/3? How long does that number go on until it is EXACTLY 2/3? Whoah....great minds, eh??? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Pi is one of many numbers that goes on forever...2/3 goes on forever as well Technically, it's one of an infinite number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 wouldn't it be 20 pi, as the formula is 2(pi)r Yes...the formula is pi*d, or 2pi*r. Ignatius I believe deals with stuff on a much higher plane of thinking than the circumference of a circle, so its excusable that he forgot the formula! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Technically, it's one of an infinite number. :laugh: :laugh: Yep! :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Yes...the formula is pi*d, or 2pi*r. Ignatius I believe deals with stuff on a much higher plane of thinking than the circumference of a circle, so its excusable that he forgot the formula! don't worry, i know my place... :allhail: incase you're wondering, that's me on the throne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 20 Pi ? :paranoid:Your desire to perform science without calculus is admirable, but there's a reason newton invented/stole calculus to do physics. Or did Newton steal/ invent Calculus to cheat on some problems he has but could not answer logically. Thus LIMITS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 It is pervasive throughout all my conversations on this subject. Let's try this...... What is the circumference of a circle whos radius is 10? Tell me what number you use for pi. I'm feeling a little bit of deja vu... Just because you can't write something out as a number like 12345 doesn't mean it isn't a real number.I can put a string around any circle and measure its length - that makes it a real number. Just take any old string, any old circle, and any old ruler. You can't tell me that we're not capable of measuring the length of a string. I don't have to be able to write something out for it to be real, especially if I can hold it in my hand. Instead of writing 1, 2, and 3, we could call the numbers Bob, Joe-Bob, and Jim-Bob ... they would still be real numbers. Just because we call it Pi doesn't mean it's not real. To "solve" an equation, you don't need to get a number you can write in decimals. Pi is perfectly fine to have in your answers - we know exactly what it equals. http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1912028&postcount=315 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 wouldn't it be 20 pi, as the formula is 2(pi)r How does this help someone who wants a real answer to the question? it is like saying I want to build a house and want to make sure the foundation is laid square. Well great so use a^2 x b^2 = c^2 So what is the answer? Oh c^2. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 well, c is an exact rational number so it's a lot easier.More importantly portis, if you're going to require that I give you a number with a finite decimal representation you bettter be able to tell me how you're going to vut your plywood to EXACTLY 2.14 inches. I recommend Porter-Cable and Milwaukee tools for that. Iggy, I remember from my BC Cal days that there is a proof showing how a line that's one inch (or any length) long has as many points between its two ends as a line that extends for infinity. Do you or TJ have any memory of anything like that? It was pretty elegant IIRC. It has something to do with when you put the shorter length perpendicular to the infinite line and drew a line between each of the points...or something along those lines (no pun intended, I promise ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 portis, what were all trying to tell you, is that infinity is completly viable, and used in everyday mathematics. its not all that hard to fathom. what is the biggest number? how about a googaplex? that's the bigges number i've heard of, therefore its the biggest number i comprehend. because its the biggest number i can comprehend, its beyond human comprehension that there are bigger numbers, and everyone else it wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 How does this help someone who wants a real answer to the question?it is like saying I want to build a house and want to make sure the foundation is laid square. Well great so use a^2 x b^2 = c^2 So what is the answer? Oh c^2. lol what the heck is that your trying to say there? if someone needs an answer to the circumference of a circle for archetechture, they can use an approxomation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Or did Newton steal/ invent Calculus to cheat on some problems he has but could not answer logically. Thus LIMITS. And what, pray tell, is illogical about limits? If a function approaches a value y asymptotically, comes close but never actually reaches it, but never gets any smaller, what is illogical about saying the limit of that function is y? Are you saying by calling the limit of that function y, we don't understand the function? I guess I don't follow your logic...you're basically trying to disprove the fundamental theorem of calculus, which if you are successful, would overturn a lot of important developments in the world of physics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrockster21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 How does this help someone who wants a real answer to the question?it is like saying I want to build a house and want to make sure the foundation is laid square. Well great so use a^2 x b^2 = c^2 So what is the answer? Oh c^2. lol Acually, portisizzle, that is pythagorean theorem, which has to do with the length of a hypotenuse of a triangle, and nothing to do with squares. If you were building a foundation and wanted to make sure it was square, you would make the sides equal length and perpendicular to one another! I'm sorry psizzle, but its hard to take you seriously when you pose arguments like that that really don't have any relation to your argument or the argument at hand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignatius J. Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I recommend Porter-Cable and Milwaukee tools for that. Iggy, I remember from my BC Cal days that there is a proof showing how a line that's one inch (or any length) long has as many points between its two ends as a line that extends for infinity. Do you or TJ have any memory of anything like that? It was pretty elegant IIRC. It has something to do with when you put the shorter length perpendicular to the infinite line and drew a line between each of the points...or something along those lines (no pun intended, I promise ). Well, it depends on what you mean by "number of points" Usually mathematicians define it this way, if there is a one to one map between two sets they have the same number of elements. One to one means that for every element in one set there is exactly one corresponding element in the other set. If such a correspondence exists we say that the two sets have the same "number" of elements. So, suppose I have a line stretching from 0 to 1, and a line stretching from zero to infinity. It it VERY important that the line from zero to one does not contain 1. At least for this proof, maybe there is a better one.... Now consider the function f: x -> x/(1 - x) this function maps the set (0,1) to the set (0, infinity) as should be fairly clear. For example plug in 0 for x and you get 0, plug in something close to 1 and you get a really big number. This funtion is 1 to 1 because it has an inverse, g g = x/(1 + x) which takes the set (0, infinity) to the set (0,1) therefore these two sets have the same number of elements. Id that the kind of proof you remember? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Acually, portisizzle, that is pythagorean theorem, which has to do with the length of a hypotenuse of a triangle, and nothing to do with squares. If you were building a foundation and wanted to make sure it was square, you would make the sides equal length and perpendicular to one another! I'm sorry psizzle, but its hard to take you seriously when you pose arguments like that that really don't have any relation to your argument or the argument at hand... I know what it is. And few homes that are built are built like a square!! :laugh: Measure 1 foot down one length on the corner of a foundation. Two foot down the other length of the same corner. Then measure across from those two distances and they should equal three. Your final check is measuring the perpendiculars to make sure you are not building a rhombus like your way would ensure. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 And what, pray tell, is illogical about limits? If a function approaches a value y asymptotically, comes close but never actually reaches it, but never gets any smaller, what is illogical about saying the limit of that function is y? Are you saying by calling the limit of that function y, we don't understand the function?I guess I don't follow your logic...you're basically trying to disprove the fundamental theorem of calculus, which if you are successful, would overturn a lot of important developments in the world of physics... A lot of what I am saying would need the overturn of important development in the world of physics. Starting with INFINITY!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portisizzle Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I just found out that I have made 52 posts to this thread by mousing over the far right icon on the list screen. So how many more posts do I need to make to get to infinity???? :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I know what it is. And few homes that are built are built like a square!! :laugh: Measure 1 foot down one length on the corner of a foundation. Two foot down the other length of the same corner. Then measure across from those two distances and they should equal three. Your final check is measuring the perpendiculars to make sure you are not building a rhombus like your way would ensure. lol actually, 1^2 +2^2 = 5 therefore a=1 b=2 c=sqrt(5) which brings us back to the concept of infinity. the square root of 5 is an irrational number, which as an infinite amount of digits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iheartskins Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 That's definitely close to what I remember Ignatius. Thanks for posting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ancalagon the Black Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 That's definitely close to what I remember Ignatius.Thanks for posting it. Iheart, I think you'd enjoy this book: Everything & More: A Concise History of Infinity. In fact, I've recommended it earlier, in this thread--http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130195. Now, I wouldn't blame anyone for not having the stamina to read that whole thread, but if anyone does, he or she might note the source of some of my frustration in this thread. A lot of things we're discussing here have been picked over in the same words in that other thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.