My perception of Almighty God, does it concur with yours?

well, your concept o "Pi is all right" is somewhat BS. We work mostly in radians in surveying and rotational physics AND p- CHEM and Pi just gets in the way. We use Tau a lot more.


PS, its MATH, not "Maths". Its a silly contraction, its hrd to say, and it so damn Brit. Now cut it out!!

I love it when you start spitting when you try to justify your craft.

A language in search of something to which it may be applied.

Either PI is finite or not and that point depends on how much sense Infinity itself makes. A hot topic within mathematicians for the last 100 years or so.
By the way I didn't invent the topic. Mathematicians debate this every day.
No one knows if Pi has an end, that means, if it is rational, bounded.
Yes you said well its Math not maths, its unitary. I just used the common coinage. You picking on that was silly.

I am a sensible soul and it was you dismissing the fundamental questions or simply not answering not risking a pov and pot-shooting at me that started spitting. Naturally I react. You know my Latin temper.

then there is alays phi, it the rtio of the relationhip of{ A/A+B}={A/B X (phi)}
1.6188339..... yada yada yada (another infinite series much in use by biology and woodworking (I build furniture using phi)

Theres a few others that are "concept ratios" (like the number of decays pw unit time for a series of isotopes, or the Hjulstrom principal for settlement of sediments. Each has a"constant related to that feature". We are an incredibly lazy species

Thank you. Being taken seriously is a mortal sin

Do you know how much is infinity minus 1 or plus 1 ? Infinity. yeah...Infinity minus or plus Infinity ? Any number...yeah...
A bunch ton of obsessed mathematicians can't sleep well at night with that. Not that you cared...you don't give a frack about Ontology but some of us do.

No its not. I like you, this is just cultural languaging clash. I live in a recently out of Neolithic country....my use of language is somewhat less humorous.

an Aqualine nose

I only like Ontology when I can say that "ONTOLOGY RCAPITULQTES PHYLOGENY..... NOT!!"

I would put that on th chalk board when we discussed evolutionary development as a segment of paleo (back when I still taught)

I always wanted a tee shirt with just that on . One of my students had it done at the print shop and I treasure this shirt at its ratty 30th anniversary of being .

Its ratty, its torn, its had my kids puke up on it and Mrs F thinks the lettering should be washed off> But its my treasure

oh Pie is definitely finite, when the tin is empty, it's empty

I notice that lnguge thing motly from you and IZZY and I know you guys have some of the best senses of humor on the plant. It just hrd for you guys to write that way.
Eg I always liked Garrison Keillor as a spoken story teller (in hi younger days). His writings come across as almost derisive so I always found **** at which Id make snarky marginal notes . Then hen Id come acros them LATER iD THINK "WHAT TH **** WAS I ABOUT THAT DAY"?? I was pompously arguing ith someone who was making a pompous point nd I was commenting on his pomposity. I was just s bad.

For some its a pie problem all right...debating Ontology and risking a gut feeling is like making a pact with the devil...

frack it, I risk a shot at it because I am curious.

There are two ways of framing infinity.

One is rational, because its just an endless loop on a finite set of qualities. The motion never ends but the pattern is finite. Think of a nonstopping holographic set of geometric finite combinations.

The other is irrational. In there you don't just have infinite numbers but you have an infinite set of qualities. All sorts of nonsensical problems arise from it. You get mechanical and even law/rule disconnection. I don't buy that ****, I rather have Walt Disney.

One of the most interesting for me is to know on what background this free form infinity expands into...you see motion might well be a trick like Parmenides problematized long ago. If you loop around in a finite set then motion is just an illusion.

...by the way, while we are at long shot conceptual correlations, a motionless finite looping Universe is mindless.

...the infinite version might well require a mind at its core computing towards infinity. A problem solver brain...

My version of the story is the actual atheistic one...
(of course in the process I have to scrap up human volition and mind to, just robots...yet another illusion)

What language thing? Maths is short for mathematics not mathematic, that's why it has an s. You can write it how you want, but telling other people, like Fil, how to write is a bit fascistic. If he wants to write properly that's down to him. America doesn't rule the World, there are still some pockets of freedom out there.

Maths the proccess of speculation and its fields as you pointed out.
Math the unified thing we aim at.
I have space for both lingos...

You can say it how you want.

I have a "bipolar" reasoning mind set...outguessing myself playing devils advocate ad nausea...its self inflicted fated torture for me. To the point:
I love neologisms and fluid languaging. Still I aknowledge the need for precise coinage to avoid talking past each other. To top it off I am lazy on details, n obsessed with fundamentals. A contradiction in terms. Ya all be patient with my craziness.

Like I said, say it how you want.

I do.
...each version in its own timing and context.