EPTGet rid of pi? - Page 13
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
EtherealDeath
United States8366 Posts
| ||
|
SpaceFighting
New Zealand690 Posts
| ||
|
revy
United States1524 Posts
Or really... e^{i*tau}-1=0 | ||
|
Subversion
South Africa3627 Posts
 Seriously, even with my limited understanding, seems like a pretty trivial point. | ||
|
Zaros
United Kingdom3692 Posts
Pi has been used for hundres/thosands of years i think there is a reason for that tbh. | ||
|
mangomango
United States265 Posts
| ||
|
Bibdy
United States3481 Posts
| ||
|
alepov
Netherlands1132 Posts
| ||
|
Nuttyguy
United Kingdom1526 Posts
| ||
|
alepov
Netherlands1132 Posts
On July 03 2011 00:44 Nuttyguy wrote: what would the tau sign look like though? pi looks good already Like this obv + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/images/stories/pi-tau-02.jpg) | ||
|
intotheheart
Canada33091 Posts
| ||
|
ShocK~
United States5 Posts
| ||
|
Nuttyguy
United Kingdom1526 Posts
i like pi better won't confuse my writing when i'm writing fast. | ||
|
Veldril
Thailand1817 Posts
| ||
|
Chras
Canada50 Posts
| ||
|
thabanana
Canada31 Posts
| ||
|
MementoMori
Canada419 Posts
| ||
|
linuxfan
Denmark55 Posts
On July 02 2011 11:35 L3gendary wrote: I say no, just for the sake of Euler's identity. THIS! | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On July 02 2011 23:12 Workforce wrote: No. Euler's identity becomes even more elegant with Tau ( e^(i*Tau) = 1), which also neatly highlights the geometric interpretation of the formula (That one TURN in the complex plane takes you around in a circle and back to the same place). Also, lets look at some common quadratic forms that pop up in physics: *The distance a body falls in earth's gravitational field is (1/2)gt^2 *The energy stored in spring is (1/2)kx^2 *The kinetic energy of a body is (1/2)mv^2 Aaaand i guess you can see where this is going... *The area of a circle is (1/2)Tau*r^2 BAM. That's a coincidental and purely cosmetic similarity. There are lots of 1/2xy^2 things in physics because there are lots of linear relationships you integrate to get a quantity which is more meaningful. Lots of constant gradients. The relation of the area of a trivial object in a plane to its defining characteristic (circle: radius) is just a function of how you construct the object and doesn't really have a deeper meaning. Unless you want to use it as an analogy. With tau, you want to define a circle by its diameter, which is not actually how you naturally construct a circle (in my opinion). It seems ugly to me. The reason we have pi is because the greeks used a compass to do geometry. What if I wanted to arbitrarily choose a new defining characteristic for a square? I want to "name" a square by its diagonal, r, not its side, x. Usually we say A = x^2. In terms of the diagonal, it's A = 1/2 r^2. BAM rings hollow. Though I admit it's superficially attractive at first. | ||
|
Workforce
Sweden70 Posts
On July 03 2011 01:39 MementoMori wrote: I'm not a mathematician but what's the problem with just using both?? If the formula is easier to understand using pi then use pi, if it is with tau then use tau! But maybe there's an issue I'm not seeing The point the Tauists are trying to get across is that its pretty much always easier or more intuitive to use tau instead of pi. To the people saying it would just be more confusing for students: You dont have to make a big deal out of this. All you have to do is at some point say "for convinience sake let tau = 2*pi" and continue from there. | ||
| ||
