EPTalso, this just occurred to me >.>:
+ Show Spoiler +
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/nP3FC.jpg)
Get rid of pi? - Page 14
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
fabiano
Brazil4644 Posts
also, this just occurred to me >.>: + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
happyness
United States2400 Posts
On July 02 2011 11:41 BlackJack wrote: I'd hate to think that people doing advanced mathematics would be helped out a lot by not having to multiply something by 2. LOL but multiplying by 2 makes it sooooo confusing! :D | ||
|
raiame
United States421 Posts
On July 03 2011 01:53 EatThePath wrote: 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. But there is a linear relationship that you integrate to get the area. You integrate rdrdtheta, and theta would be integrated from 0 to Tau. | ||
|
MementoMori
Canada419 Posts
On July 03 2011 02:06 fabiano wrote: So no serious consequences from a possible change? If so, why not keep pi since its what everyone already knows... also, this just occurred to me >.>: + Show Spoiler + lol I thought the same thing... It's bad when you relate words to starcraft. I knew the Caduceus was something related to the medical field because of the Caduceus reactor for medivacs... | ||
|
Workforce
Sweden70 Posts
On July 03 2011 01:53 EatThePath wrote: 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. Yes, they are all the result of a simple integration and it doesnt have any meaning beyond being similar. However, i think the formula looks better this way since it clearly hints at how it was derived. And thats my argument, i suppose. Tau is just a more elegant and beautiful way of defining the circle constant. There's a measure of subjectivity there i guess, so i'm not going to go out of my way to prove you "wrong". Also tau is defined by the radius; pi by the diameter. I think you got it mixed up. | ||
|
FetusFondler
United States246 Posts
 | ||
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On July 03 2011 01:58 Workforce wrote: All you have to do is at some point say "for convinience sake let tau = 2*pi" and continue from there. I think you underestimate how easily some students get confused lol... they have enough trouble understanding the unit circle (some students)... using a substitution doesn't help. You have to either teach these students using pi or teach them using tau.... LATER maybe you can go back and relate them... but many students couldn't handle doing it at the beginning. | ||
|
EatThePath
United States3943 Posts
On July 03 2011 02:23 Workforce wrote:+ Show Spoiler + + Show Spoiler + On July 03 2011 01:53 EatThePath wrote: 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. Yes, they are all the result of a simple integration and it doesnt have any meaning beyond being similar. However, i think the formula looks better this way since it clearly hints at how it was derived. And thats my argument, i suppose. Tau is just a more elegant and beautiful way of defining the circle constant. There's a measure of subjectivity there i guess, so i'm not going to go out of my way to prove you "wrong". Also tau is defined by the radius; pi by the diameter. I think you got it mixed up. A = pi r^2 = tau/2 r^2 pi = tau/2 radius = diameter / 2 edit* I guess we should say, associated with I think you got it mixed up? hehe ^^ But ya at a certain point it's subjective. But I stand by what I said. | ||
|
Kwidowmaker
Canada978 Posts
On July 03 2011 01:23 Veldril wrote: I don't really mind using a constant to denote 2pi. But using tau is not a good idea because it is already used for so many variables already. Pi is used in many places as well. As a comparison: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi_(letter) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tau Both letters find common use as standard notation. Ultimately it's a trivial matter as many other mathematicians pointed out. However, despite being trivial I think the advocates for change make a compelling case, though perhaps not one that demands urgency. Would it be nice to see tau in use? Sure. Would I mind if it never saw use? No. | ||
|
Reptilia
Chile913 Posts
anyways, PI STAYS AS PI! plus ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/AUtOJ.jpg) | ||
|
Lightningbullet
United States507 Posts
Obviously pi is better. We are also more accustomed to pi. Pi is also more delicious. :D | ||
|
Nacl(Draq)
United States302 Posts
I mean... with E=mc^2 we could change all mass in every equation to energy/c^2. That would simplify some equations, but it would make others more complex. Same exact thing as this. We use both degrees and radians for different equations and they are interchangeable and any physics class in college is nitpicky and makes you answer in degrees or radians and deducts points if you just do radians. In my opinion this is started by physics professors who want to make a name for themselves because they're too lazy to do actual work or they want to find a way to cause their students lots of confusion. | ||
|
saltywet
Hong Kong1316 Posts
in conclusion, white mathematicians have too much time on their hands | ||
|
Eufouria
United Kingdom4425 Posts
On July 02 2011 22:15 OrchidThief wrote: I'm positive I've encountered it somewhere, though the specific situation eludes me. But my point was that just because a greek symbol is used in a formula somewhere does not make it universally sacred. (And technically I did write Pi and not pi. =b ) Well its used for the pion sub-atomic particle, but that makes sense because its the pi meson. I'm pretty sure its used for some other stuff, but probably not as much as tau. I mean its so well known that it would be even more confusing than all the other letters that mean 400 different constants or variables (fuck you letter E). On July 03 2011 03:22 saltywet wrote: so, americans and the british want to change a universal constant because 6.28 is somehow a "more correct" form for pi. in conclusion, white mathematicians have too much time on their hands Maybe they wanted to give Asian mathematicians some time to make ground breaking discoveries too. ZING. | ||
|
WGT-Baal
France3433 Posts
But i m more used to Electronics and Pi is very useful for a phase (as you usally measure it between -Pi and +Pi) Same can be said with the Z transformation (where the function is usually written as a complex) Moreover, in Mathematics as well as Physics, nothing prevents you from saying at the start: new_constant= 2Pi and then use new_constant for the rest of it. It s a funny article though  | ||
|
DragonDefonce
United States790 Posts
| ||
|
Papvin
Denmark610 Posts
On a sidenote, all busses are changing numbers completely soon, but still... I mean, it's pi! Don't mess with the O.G.'s! | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On July 02 2011 11:44 GGTeMpLaR wrote: I feel like the US should make a full switch to the metric system before we consider changing pi. yeah that's perhaps more pertinent. The amount of trouble metric system cause... | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
On July 03 2011 02:44 micronesia wrote: I think you underestimate how easily some students get confused lol... they have enough trouble understanding the unit circle (some students)... using a substitution doesn't help. You have to either teach these students using pi or teach them using tau.... LATER maybe you can go back and relate them... but many students couldn't handle doing it at the beginning. I would have definitely preferred tau for all things trig  I graduated from uni not understanding where the cosine or sine curve came from -_^ it just never clicked, lol. I just remembered the pi/4, pi/2, etc because "that's the way it is". That Vihart video made me go O_O /facepalm I'm probably in the minority though lol, doubt anyone else is actually that clueless | ||
|
micronesia
United States24753 Posts
On July 03 2011 04:05 JeeJee wrote: I'm probably in the minority though lol, doubt anyone else is actually that clueless Many people are way more clueless lol | ||
| ||
