6
   

Is Pi (3.1415926....) a Lie?

 
 
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 09:20 am
yep, it is.
 
usmankhalid665
 
  2  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 09:30 am
@Quehoniaomath,
How is it a lie?
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 10:26 am
@usmankhalid665,
It isn't :

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Approximate_value)

0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  3  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 11:36 am
Pi is an irrational number, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to to its diameter. I am not sure what it means to suggest that it is a "lie". The ratio can be found to a greater or lesser accuracy by experiment, or by calculation.

Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 11:39 am
@contrex,
Quote:
Pi is an irrational number, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to to its diameter. I am not sure what it means to suggest that it is a "lie". The ratio can be found to a greater or lesser accuracy by experiment, or by calculation.



well, there is really more to it, it sure is NOT
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510.
George
 
  2  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 11:43 am
@contrex,
contrex wrote:
. . . I am not sure what it means to suggest that it is a "lie". . .
It means the following:
* one misunderstands the word "lie"
* one misunderstands the word "approximation"
* one is unable to create a working link
0 Replies
 
dalehileman
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 11:44 am
@contrex,
Often wondered, Cobn, whether it can be proven irrational. I suspect so, but then one might wonder, for instance, at what count of digits there might appear twenty consecutive zeroes and whether this count too might be calculated
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:25 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
Quehoniaomath wrote:

well, there is really more to it, it sure is NOT
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510.


What are you trying to say? Of course π is "not" that. It is "not" this either:

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620
8998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481117
4502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867
8316527120190914564856692346034861045432664821339360726024914127372458700660631
5588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146951941
5116094330572703657595919530921861173819326117931051185480744623799627495673518
8575272489122793818301194912983367336244065664308602139494639522473719070217986
0943702770539217176293176752384674818467669405132000568127145263560827785771342
7577896091736371787214684409012249534301465495853710507922796892589235420199561
1212902196086403441815981362977477130996051870721134999999837297804995105973173
2816096318595024459455346908302642522308253344685035261931188171010003137838752
8865875332083814206171776691473035982534904287554687311595628638823537875937519
5778185778053217122680661300192787661119590921642019893809525720106548586327886
5936153381827968230301952035301852968995773622599413891249721775283479131515574
8572424541506959508295331168617278558890750983817546374649393192550604009277016
7113900984882401285836160356370766010471018194295559619894676783744944825537977
4726847104047534646208046684259069491293313677028989152104752162056966024058038
1501935112533824300355876402474964732639141992726042699227967823547816360093417
2164121992458631503028618297455570674983850549458858692699569092721079750930295
5321165344987202755960236480665499119881834797753566369807426542527862551818417
5746728909777727938000816470600161452491921732172147723501414419735685481613611
5735255213347574184946843852332390739414333454776241686251898356948556209921922
2184272550254256887671790494601653466804988627232791786085784383827967976681454
1009538837863609506800642251252051173929848960841284886269456042419652850222106
6118630674427862203919494504712371378696095636437191728746776465757396241389086
5832645995813390478027590099465764078951269468398352595709825822620522489407726
7194782684826014769909026401363944374553050682034962524517493996514314298091906
5925093722169646151570985838741059788595977297549893016175392846813826868386894
2774155991855925245953959431049972524680845987273644695848653836736222626099124
6080512438843904512441365497627807977156914359977001296160894416948685558484063
5342207222582848864815845602850601684273945226746767889525213852254995466672782
3986456596116354886230577456498035593634568174324112515076069479451096596094025
2288797108931456691368672287489405601015033086179286809208747609178249385890097
1490967598526136554978189312978482168299894872265880485756401427047755513237964
1451523746234364542858444795265867821051141354735739523113427166102135969536231
4429524849371871101457654035902799344037420073105785390621983874478084784896833
2144571386875194350643021845319104848100537061468067491927819119793995206141966
3428754440643745123718192179998391015919561814675142691239748940907186494231961
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:27 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
What are you trying to say? Of course π is "not" that. It is "not" this either:


lol
No, that is not what I mean.

This is closer to the truth:

Pi=3.14460551102969314427823434337183571809248823135089…

contrex
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:45 pm
@Quehoniaomath,
Quehoniaomath wrote:

This is closer to the truth:
Pi=3.14460551102969314427823434337183571809248823135089…

How did you get that result?
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:53 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
How did you get that result?


Good question. However not I did that but someone who is deep into vedic math. (See my thread on Galactic Mathematics or vedic math).
I come to that, but firts this:

Quote:
NASA admitted that when the original Mooncraft landing occurred, the targeted spot was missed by about 20km?
What could have been wrong with the Calculations?
NASA subsequently adjusted their traditional mathematical value for Pi (3.141592…) by increasing it in the 3rd decimal by .003!


Quote:
Also, an ex-Engineer from NASA, "Smokey” admitted (via email) that when he was making metal cylinders for this same Mooncraft, finished parts just did not fit perfectly, so an adjusted value for Pi was also implemented.


Quote:
What if both an algebraic and a geometric proof existed, both irrefutable evidence that Pi is deliberately deficient, that Pi is a Lie?
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:56 pm
Quote:
Archimedes Fundamental Error:

In all due good respects, we must first honour Archimedes of Syracuse 2,225 years ago, who gave the world his system on how to calculate Pi, approximated to 22÷7, by cutting the circle into say 16 slices of a pizza, and measuring the 16 edge lengths of these 16 triangular polygons (fig 3), to get a good estimate for the circumference of a circle. The idea was that if we kept making the slices of pizza smaller and smaller, by subsequently cutting the circle into 32 slices, then 64, then 128 then 256 slices, we would get a better and more accurate representation for the circumference. The Fundamental Flawed Logic or Error with Archimede’s Increasing Polygon Method was that he failed to measure The Area Under The Curve. In fact, he assumed that The Area Under The Curve, just magically disappeared. Even in his time, Archimedes admitted that his value was a mere estimate!


Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 12:58 pm
Quote:
Ok, lets give more credit to Archimedes and give him a green tick to say that yes, the value of 3.1415… is a good approximation for pi, but it is only an approximation, his logic for that time was commendable, considering that they did not have calculators or computers, so we can say that his Pi is the Limit of Infinite Straight Lines, but does not account for the Area Under The Curve. It has always bothered me, since high school, that we use straight lines to measure a curved circle.


0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:01 pm
Quote:
The only thing in the way is the pride and arrogance of mathematicians who cannot conceive of such a notion that Pi could be anything else than what their books have instructed them to believe. It is their lack of understanding of Fractal Harmonics (based on the cascading proportions of the Fibonacci Sequence) which hinders them to comprehend the elegance of the geometric solution known as ]the Fairywand Method identical to Saint Germain’s Maltese Cross. Fractal Harmonics allows us to zoom forever into the Area Under The Curve and detect more infinitesimal Areas Under The Curve, concluding that old Pi is only an approximation, a limit of millions or billions of straight lines, that it is deficient, that the True Value of Pi must be a fraction more than we estimated, and that it must be based on Phi, The Golden Mean Harmonics. Thus 4 divided by the Square Root of Phi (1.272…) gives the correct frequency of 3.144… its really very simple.
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:02 pm
http://www.jainmathemagics.com/editor/assets/web-ArcherWithBackground_190kb.jpg
contrex
 
  2  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:05 pm
This is a lot of ****. You are either deliberately arguing counterfactually to get attention, or else you really believe that "Vedic" crap, either way you are wasting our time.
Quehoniaomath
 
  0  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:10 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
This is a lot of ****. You are either deliberately arguing counterfactually to get attention, or else you really believe that "Vedic" crap, either way you are wasting our time


Really? I have studied Vedic Maths for years and it is superior to our conventional stupid and idiotic mathematical system.
well, you asked, I anwered.

But it seems to be from your point of view something you don't like, right? Wink

But anyway, this is not about Vedic math per se but about the correct value of pi.

And no I am not deliberately arguing bla bla bla bla.



0 Replies
 
contrex
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:13 pm
@dalehileman,
dalehileman wrote:
Often wondered, Cobn, whether it can be proven irrational.

It can be, and has been. In 1761, Johann Heinrich Lambert proved that π is irrational by first showing that this continued fraction expansion holds:

http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p29/badoit/ConFrac1_zps19676f10.jpg

Then Lambert proved that if x is non-zero and rational then this expression must be irrational. Since tan(π/4) = 1, it follows that π/4 is irrational and therefore that π is irrational.
George
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:14 pm
Ahhhh . . .
Jain 108 Mathemagics!
Now I get it.
0 Replies
 
Quehoniaomath
 
  -2  
Reply Thu 10 Jul, 2014 01:17 pm
@contrex,
Quote:
This is a lot of ****. You are either deliberately arguing counterfactually to get attention, or else you really believe that "Vedic" crap, either way you are wasting our time.


But maybe you can give good arguments for what you wrote? Wink
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Amount of Time - Question by Randy Dandy
logical number sequence riddle - Question by feather
Calc help needed - Question by mjborowsky
HELP! The Product and Quotient Rules - Question by charsha
STRAIGHT LINES - Question by iqrasarguru
Possible Proof of the ABC Conjecture - Discussion by oralloy
Help with a simple math problem? - Question by Anonymous1234567890
How do I do this on a ti 84 calculator? - Question by Anonymous1234567890
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Is Pi (3.1415926....) a Lie?
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/18/2018 at 06:23:17