Metanet Forums

This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

Tsukatu wrote:Revelation!

I think you mean revolution. ;)

Huh.

edit: No coincidence I guess as to the date you're posting this on. (almost)

doubleedit: Right the url right right

Huh. You know, I did notice in my calculus classes that a whole lot of formulas that had anything to do with trigonometry required you to remember to multiply by two in arbitrary places.

On second thought, using tau would ruin the Euler Identity, so I doubt this will catch on. For every pi*2 that you get rid of, there'd be a tau/2 in another formula to replace all the instances in which you don't multiply pi by 2.

Wait. On third thought, it wouldn't ruin the Euler identity. It'd just switch the 0 and the 1. Well, still no way it'd be changed unfortunately.

Even as someone who loves pi, I do wish it had been established as C/r. It does make much more sense. However, I think multiplying by 2 will probably be easier than trying to change such a well-established convention, unfortunately.

@ Tsukatu below: I did read the "manifesto." I still think many people will want to continue simply using pi, for the same reason America still hasn't universally adopted the metric system. Even though I agree that this new symbol would be more mathematically fundamental in many cases, the transition will not be easy.

Second edit: I am, however, going to start using tau instead of pi, and try to spread the word.

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

Yes, but you also don't believe in negative numbers.

OneSevenNine wrote:On second thought, using tau would ruin the Euler Identity, so I doubt this will catch on. For every pi*2 that you get rid of, there'd be a tau/2 in another formula to replace all the instances in which you don't multiply pi by 2.

If you had read the manifesto, you'd see that this is a case against pi and in favor of tau.

Scrivener wrote:However, I think multiplying by 2 will probably be easier than trying to change such a well-established convention, unfortunately.

If you had read the manifesto, you'd see that the first steps toward changing the convention are as easy as putting "let tau = 2*pi for convenience" at the top of the paper.

Please stop calling it a manifesto; you make me nervous.

Tsukatu wrote:If you had read the manifesto, you'd see that this is a case against pi and in favor of tau.

Yeah, I only read the first part when I made that post. I've read the whole thing, and the more I think about it, the more it makes perfect sense.

Tsukatu wrote:

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

Yes, but you also don't believe in negative numbers.

They are bullshit!

ghoulash wrote:Please stop calling it a manifesto; you make me nervous.

If you had read the manifesto, you'd see that that's how it refers to itself, openly and repeatedly.

SlappyMcGee wrote:

Tsukatu wrote:

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

Yes, but you also don't believe in negative numbers.

They are bullshit!

I have always said that -x is just implying 0-x, but removing the 0, as it is semi-redundant. I'm glad I'm not the only one who thinks the concept of a negative number is absurd.

I'm assuming you also don't like imaginary numbers? What about zero?

Before I read the end where it says it was published yesterday, I could have swore I read that exact article a few years ago. I guess someone else had just wrote nearly the same thing

smartalco wrote:Before I read the end where it says it was published yesterday, I could have swore I read that exact article a few years ago. I guess someone else had just wrote nearly the same thing

They may have made more or less the same argument. He did mention that the manifesto was heavily inspired by some work called Pi Is Wrong or something.

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

But the proposed replacement, tau, is also irrational, so it still doesn't exist.

scythe wrote:

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

But the proposed replacement, tau, is also irrational, so it still doesn't exist.

Listen; you subscribe to the "Get rid of Pi and replace it with Tau" theory and I subscribe to the "Get rid of Pi" theory. It's the same goal, for now. Like when Doctor Doom works with Mr. Fantastic to save the universe so that Doctor Doom can dominate it (Issue 138, "The FANTASTIC Collaboration!")

The sentence "Pi is wrong" is wrong.

Pi is right, it's just inconvenient at various times.
This is pretty cool though. I might use tau in my coming exams, if I think of it.

Donfuy, your sig rapes my eyes =n=;

SlappyMcGee wrote:

Tsukatu wrote:

SlappyMcGee wrote:This may seem strange, but as AF and blue_tetris can verify, I've always disliked pi.

Yes, but you also don't believe in negative numbers.

They are bullshit!

That viewpoint seems a little negOVERFLOW ERROR

Way to post down-low to the entire world, Suki.

Tsukatu wrote:

This seems to be directly against the wishes of the heretic. Whose side are you on?

Tsukatu wrote:They may have made more or less the same argument. He did mention that the manifesto was heavily inspired by some work called Pi Is Wrong or something.

I read Pi Is Wrong, but that isn't what I'm talking about. I recall reading an article that was nearly the same down to the organization of arguments and page formatting. I would honestly not be surprised if this was found to be copy/pasted from elsewhere (or was previously published in a lesser known place)

I am confused by the following two posts.

Kablizzy wrote:Way to post down-low to the entire world, Suki.

SlappyMcGee wrote:This seems to be directly against the wishes of the heretic. Whose side are you on?

Please explain yourselves.