Yep. Everything that we have discovered so far, and everything that will ever be discovered, has already been known, hundreds of thousands years ago, and parts have been written down. This knowledge comes originally from the Atlanteans and Lemurians. Man, because of his arrogance, has created different religions out of their knowledge and formed it egoistically according to race, skincolor, culture and so on. The Atlanteans weren't like us, they were not egoistic, they loved and knew everything, they could convert energies in every possible way, without any devices. They could also communicate telepathically and lift their vehicles from the ground with their mind's power Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Old fables tell of them, but people laugh at them Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
:m: So was Jesus an Atlantean or Lemurian? I read Plato, he seemed to believe otherwise. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Wait, I've seen this before... Umm - ahh yes, YODA! I always thought George Lucas was a genius. Turns out he was a plagiarist Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Just playing with pi. I found that if you take every digit 0-9 and divide 360 degrees by that digit every digit ends up in a whole number except 7 360/0 = 360 360/1 = 360 360/2 = 180 360/3 = 120 360/4 = 90 360/5 = 72 360/6 = 60 360/7 = 51.42857143 360/8 = 45 360/9 = 40 Maybe the number 7 in the pi sequence is important....
Yes interesting. I think one reason 360 was chosen (seems arbitrary at first glance) was for just this reason. Makes figuring things in the absence of calculators easier. Just a minor point: 360/0 = ∞
360= 2*180= 2^2*90= 2^3*45= 2^4*3*15= 2^4*3^2*5. The only prime numbers between 1 and 10 are 2, 3, 5, and 7.
360/0 is undefined in the real numbers. There is (or was?) a group called the Duodecimal society that supported a change to base 12 partly because 12 is 'more divisible' than 10. QQ:There's nothing special about 7 and pi. 360 is an arbitrary choice for the number of degrees in a circle, you could have just as easily gone with 210 instead, or 2520 if you prefer.
360/0 = ∞ Or more importantly 1/∞ = 0 so 1/0 = ∞, 360 * 1/0 = 360 * ∞ = ∞ That's just how ∞ works. No, 360 was chosen because it has so many factors. It is just easier to work with.
Infinity is not a real number. Division by 0 is not defined in the real numbers. That's all there is to it. (yes I do know what a limit is, but those aren't what you've written or how this originally came up in this thread) You miss the point-there's nothing mathematical compelling us to declare there are 360 degrees in a circle. It's not a 'natural' choice but one of convenience, and my history may be off but I believe it had something to do with a 360 day calender (Babylonians?). A fear of fractions does not constitute a mathematically 'natural' choice, nor does happening to live on a planet that happens to have a 360 day year (or close to it). There is nothing special about 7 and pi based on the fact that 7 does not divide 360 evenly. Degrees themselves as a unit of measure are not a mathematically natural thing for that matter. You'll notice in most calculus courses, actually all I've ever seen, degrees are quickly dropped for radians as the more natural measure (of course with an explanation of how they relate).
That's completely idotic, if you think about it. Because there's always a number which is more divisible than any you give. So maybe you should choose something like 29#. Where p# is similar to the factorial (p!) , but only involving all primes from 2 to p.
Sorry, (or not). Division by zero is quite well defined- as infinity, except in the case where your dividend is also zero. I don't see that this is a difficult concept to grasp. But there <I>are</I> lots of people who shy away when they see some division by zero. I don't understand why they're so afraid.
There is no point in blasting nonsense about real numbers. Infinity is the result of dividing by an infinitely small number (i.e. approaching 0). There is nothing too complicated about it. It originally came up when QQ said 360/0 = 360 and SL correctly pointed out to him that 360/0 was not 360 and was in fact ∞. What do you not understand? You can not claim division by 0 if you want to only consider a real concievable number - the issue of bringing up "real numbers" is nonsense here. The point went right over your head. There IS something mathematically compelling to use 360. The many factors of 360 is the mathematically compelling reason. Now if you said there is no physically compelling reason to use 360, then that would be true. 360 degrees in a circle has no physical meaning.
Yep, it's idiotic. There's no fear, only your lack of understanding of what the real numbers are and how they are defined. Look up the axioms for a complete ordered field (just the field axioms will suffice), you'll see that division by zero is undefined (zero has no multiplicative inverse). Regarding infinity, look up the extended real numbers (affine or projective) for ways to include it to the bunch. If you want the reals to remain a complete ordered field, then there's no way to add in infinity.
shmoe, go stick your head back in the mathematics textbook dealing with real numbers you just came from and leave it there. One does not need real numbers to see what 360/0 will be if we consider 0 as an approximately tiny number.
Wow, in one paragraph you accuse me of blasting nonsense about the real numbers and you manage to talk about an "infinitely small number" and you seem to want to include infinity as a real number(?). Oh, the irony. This isn't about limits, if that's what you are trying to get at. What is a "real concievable number"? The real numbers are nonsense here? What was he talking about then? Human convenience does not dictate mathematical properties. There's a reason that trig functions are defined in terms of radians by mathematicians. 360 degrees is an artificial human construct to make angles things easier to work with (in some cases) and has no bearing at all on the structure or behavior of pi. I should clarify that "mathematically complelling" to me does not include any choices designed to make life easier for humans. As in there is no mathematically complelling reason to use base 10 over base 6, but there is a mathematically compelling reason to use radians over degrees for defining trig functions (e.g. look at the derivatives of sin, cos).
fine, then accept the fact that your real numbers are not the same as the real numbers used by mathematicians everywhere and that whatever statements that may be true in your version of the real numbers have no bearing on the usual ones.
It doesn't affect the rest of the real numbers. What is wrong with infinity? And how can it suddenly break down all the other rules. Show me one rule that it violates.
No. I do not consider infinity to be a real number! That is why I said bringing up real numbers is nonsense. Yes it is. We need not talk about real numbers. GOOD GOD. Who is he? A real number is a number you can concieve of, what is wrong with the adjective I included? Well I certainly do no believe 360 degrees has any bearing on the structure of pi, but that doesn't mean that the root of 360 degrees in a circle did not have its origin from a mathematically compelling reason. The reason just isn't the same as dealing with other things for which pi was introduced. The constuct of pi was to make things easier for humans as well. One can write all the trig functions with another constant so that degrees can be used. That is all pi is, a constant that makes the equations easier for humans.
