Discussion about math, puzzles, games and fun. Useful symbols: ÷ × ½ √ ∞ ≠ ≤ ≥ ≈ ⇒ ± ∈ Δ θ ∴ ∑ ∫ • π ƒ ¹ ² ³ °
 

You are not logged in. #1 20110303 04:47:41
Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:07:13) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #2 20110303 11:48:26
Re: Pi DiscussionYour bracket method allows digits from adjacent brackets to be added together with a shifted digit on one of them. igloo myrtilles fourmis #3 20110303 20:22:47
Re: Pi DiscussionThere is no most accurate fraction because there is an infinite amount of them. I hope you are not applying your .9999999... ideas to pi. It is fine in chess for you to hold other opinions but in mathematics we must all speak the same language. To accomplish that we agree ( all of us, amateur and professional ) to define terms before we use them.
How does that equal 355 / 113?
You are absolutley right. So why work on it? If the brightest minds in history could not where does that leave the rest of us? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #4 20110303 21:20:33
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:07:51) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #5 20110304 00:52:20
Re: Pi DiscussionWhy do you believe that the 3rd digit of pi is inaccurate?
Supposing it is not you? Why continue to hammer away at the decimal digits of every decimal you see? Could you not find something more productive to do? Something with a chance of success. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #6 20110304 02:04:47
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:08:26) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #7 20110304 06:24:18
Re: Pi DiscussionI hope FLT means Fork Lift Truck because you are looking at the only dude who never worked on the FLT or FLT. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #8 20110304 07:27:33
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:08:49) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #9 20110304 18:00:26
Re: Pi Discussion
This is your exact question, I have answered it. Your question is like asking what is the biggest number found so far?! I told you there is no biggest fraction. We can always find one that is larger with a little more work.
What does this mean? Please make an effort to eliminate vague comments that can be misinterpreted. In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #10 20110304 20:48:57
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:09:09) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #11 20110304 21:12:59
Re: Pi DiscussionYes!? Don't stop till you are satisfied!!!? "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #12 20110304 21:30:48
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:09:31) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #13 20110304 21:34:55
Re: Pi DiscussionThe first one was the Gregory Leibnitz series. Here is Newtons best idea. Or use the Borwein formulas which are based on the AGM. You lose patience or until your machine melts. This one gives quintic convergence to pi / 4. With it you can easily verify that 3.14 is correct. Also if you try you will see there is no best fraction. 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749567351885752724891227938183011949129833673362440656643086021394946395224737190702179860943702770539217176293176752384674818467669405132000568127145263560827785771342757789609173637178721468440901224953430146549585371050792279689258923542019956112129021960864034418159813629774771309960518707211349999998372978049951059731732816096318595024459455346908302642522308253344685035261931188171010003137838752886587533208381420617177669147303598253490428755468731159562863882353787593751957781857780532171226806613001927876611195909216420199 In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #14 20110304 21:56:06
Re: Pi Discussionhi bobbym, You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei #15 20110304 22:02:28
Re: Pi DiscussionHi Bob; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #16 20110304 22:04:44
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:09:58) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #17 20110304 22:06:11
Re: Pi DiscussionHi; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #18 20110304 22:20:06
Re: Pi DiscussionHi bobbym, Now let him start discussing about the accuracy of √2 "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #19 20110304 22:24:34
Re: Pi DiscussionHi gAr; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #20 20110304 22:31:52
Re: Pi DiscussionHi bobbym, "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #21 20110304 22:36:21
Re: Pi DiscussionHi gAr; In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #22 20110304 22:46:43
Re: Pi Discussion? Last edited by Transcendental (20110305 11:10:35) Knowing is Just Around The Corner!...And Not Knowing is Just Around The Other Corner! #23 20110304 22:48:47
Re: Pi DiscussionAh Ha! I knew it. You snuck some of that GiB decimal ideas in there. So what digit of pi do you believe is incorrect besides the second one? In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. #24 20110304 22:50:10
Re: Pi DiscussionYes, I read his biography a few months ago. "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense"  Buddha? "Data! Data! Data!" he cried impatiently. "I can't make bricks without clay." #25 20110304 22:54:05
Re: Pi DiscussionHe did not have a tremendous amount of formal math knowledge. Hardy had to teach him about complex numbers. But in everything he did he was ahead of his time! You might run into him for the creation of the HardyRamanujanRademacher formula for p(n). In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them. I have the result, but I do not yet know how to get it. All physicists, and a good many quite respectable mathematicians are contemptuous about proof. 