Pi - No Patterns, because Pi is the pattern

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience' started by Quantum Quack, Jul 23, 2013.

1. CptBorkRobbing the Shalebridge CradleValued Senior Member

Messages:
5,813
Let's just pretend mathematicians made a huge series of booboos starting 200 years ago, and the hundreds of thousands who've covered their work since were all mistaken idiots who weren't smart enough to work at the grocery store, and had to get a job researching pure math instead. Let's suppose in fact that $\pi$ were actually a rational number, say 3.1416. Tell me what fundamental laws of physics that alters (I'm not talking about the radius of a hydrogen atom or anything like that, but rather the fundamental laws of nature themselves).

3. eramSciengineerValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,876
You said that to you there is no distinction between physics, maths, cosmology. That is most certainly not true. Then you proceeded to talk a whole bunch of nonsense about pi.

"I am not sure why your being wrong some how makes ME irrational?"
What exactly do you mean?

5. Quantum QuackLife's a tease...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
19,285
I said that "TO ME" there is no distinction....is that a problem?
and I am quite prepared to stand by what I wrote along with Bertrand Russel and a heap of other really smart men and women...

7. Quantum QuackLife's a tease...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
19,285
None of course... so... ? What's you point?

OMG, Mathematics actually gets something right for a change and generates Pi correctly as far as universal physics truths are concerned and you wish to play hop-scotch over the point

[just kidding]

Last edited: Aug 4, 2013
8. eramSciengineerValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,876
Well of course it is. You talk so much nonsense that it is impossible to have a proper objective discussion.

9. eramSciengineerValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,876
So it's certainly not rational to think that the irrationality of has fundamental implications in physics.

But you appear to think otherwise.

10. Quantum QuackLife's a tease...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
19,285
why is my opinion as stated nonsense?

11. Quantum QuackLife's a tease...Valued Senior Member

Messages:
19,285
Physics or Physical universe? which?
btw is that you in your avatar?

12. eramSciengineerValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,876
Physics.

Nope, it's a member of Daft Punk. Did you really put your real photo in your avatar?

13. rr6BannedBanned

Messages:
635
Al I've ever said is a perfect circle or sphere is concept mind/intellect only. You bring zero error into the disscussion and that seems unnecesary to me and only tends to convolute a simple concept of a true/perfect circle.

Maybe you can explain what your going on with zero error is about in some way that seems relevant, then I will consider it more.

Zero is a non-counting number i.e. zero is not a quantity so does not count. Infinity suggests a never ending counting ergo eternal counting of an infinite set of sequencial numbers.

zero is a non-counting number ergo non-value would seem as if not more appropriate in definning zero.

[/QUOTE]

I agree QQ, so if you think I misunderstood, then address those specific statements by you and me instead of trying to make gross generalizations of every conversation I've had with many diffferrent members, that, include varying degrees of troll and troll-like behaviour.

Ex. I see now perhaps what you meant when you used the words "more than infinite" you did not mean a quantity but something other than a numerical qunatity yet related/association and beyond number and quantity. I dunno yet. But you did not come back and state as such, so that is why I had to twice--- two sperate responses ---address your comment as being nonsensical.

So yes, if you clarify and specific clarify by addressing specific statments by you me or others, as they happen, then we have the best chance to find clarity and move on to other significant, relevant findings, concepts etc....

Again the minimal circle( 2D enclosure ) is a triangle and as the frequency of angles, the angular deficet(?) and lines of relationship increase, then we gain in circularity never attaing a true perfect circle but with concept of an infinite set of the above givens, eternally moving in the direciont of such perfect/true concept of mind/intellect.

Similar for the the minimal 3D sphere being the tetrahedron with 12 surface angles gaining in sphericity as the frequency of angles, agngular deficit and lines of relationship increase.

Pi = 1D

Pi^3( 31.00 62 7 ) appears to infer/imply a 3D( XYZ volumetric ) association with Pi.

Pi^4( 97.40 90 91 03 40 02 43 72 36 44 03 32 68 87 05 ) may translate into a time factor/vector association with Pi.

I dunno. Just a cosmic explorer making observations and speculating on what possible correlations may exist, from varied fields of physics, nature, mathematics in general and geometry specifically.

r6

r6

14. rr6BannedBanned

Messages:
635
.."22/7"... approximates Pi

H,mmm I hadn't ever thought to much about that 22/7, until recently regarding the resultant of after subdividing Pi^4.

Recently tho someone did reply to my some of my most recent playful pondering explorations of
Pi^4 / 4 = 24.35 22 7 27 58 50 06 09 309110083172176 where I had pointed out that the 35 was rationally divisible by 7 and others should by now know my thoughts on the signficance of #7.

However, I was not even considering that #7 in the 7th integer place when I was saying that 35 was rationally divisible 7. I was just noticing the 35 was intimate with 7 that way, but since there is that 7 in the 7th interger place and QQ mentions the 22/7 fraction thingie, suddenly my attention is perked.

So anyway this dude does a sort of reverse numerology thingie on me i.e. he asked me to notice that the
22 / 7 = 3.14 28 57 14 28 571428571428571428571.....

So I want to review for others a line of facts;

Pi = 3.14 15 92 65 35897932384626433832795

Pi^2 = 9.86 96 04 40 10893586188344909998762

Pi^3 = 31.00 62 7 66 80299820175476315067101
...7 falls in the 7th integer place/position...

Pi^4 = 97.40 90 91 03 40 02 43 72 36 44 0332688705
...and divide equally by 4 i.e. XYZ and time....

24.35 22 7 27 58 50 06 09 30 91 10 08 31 72 17 6
..7 falls in the 7th integer position....

So there are the facts. Correlations if any, are for there for the pondering.

r6

Messages:
19
yes I did.

16. AlphaNumericFully ionizedRegistered Senior Member

Messages:
6,698
QQ, is there some reason you have a second account?

17. qq02Registered Member

Messages:
19
yes. I attempted to change my email address due to not receiving notifications. And Guess what!? I didn't get the email verification notice and got locked out. All attempts to contact sciforums using various means failed so I created a second account so that I could post about the issue.
see my thread in the members fora
[ no link posting capacity ]

The interesting thing is that if you do not receive an email verification link, your user account is rendered viewable but inoperable, leaving no recourse other than to generate a new account. [no response from site admin for 3 weeks]
So there appears to be a systemic glitch that must be causing a number of members to give up and go elsewhere any time sciforums fails to send notifications.

18. chingluValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,637
Cantor's set theory claims there is a set of all PI digits. They exist.

I would like to see a proof of this.

All algorithmic methods end up with an arbitrarily large finite set.

So, I want to see a proof that a set exists with all PI digits in it.

Messages:
6,698