|
What's so special about ten million?
A bunch of zeros?
Why should all the other numbers be made to feel unimportant?
Every number is special, in its own way.
Now everyone join hands and sing.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Every number is special, in its own way.
12407 isn't very interesting.
Although, ironically, it is the lowest number that isn't interesting.
Which is interesting.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Although, ironically, it is the lowest number that isn't interesting.
That's not quite right. Not all negative numbers are interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Just because it is a negative number does not make it lower.
The cardinality is unaffected by being negative for example.
Now, write out the first 30 happy squares and promise to read up on set theory 
BTW did you know you cannot construct a square with the same area as a circle.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: Just because it is a negative number does not make it lower.
I've changed my mind.
I'll do my own tax return, thanks.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: did you know you cannot construct a square with the same area as a circle.
Hwuh?
That flew past me on the first read.
For any value of r, you can construct a square that is pi.r on a side, giving it precisely the same area as a circle with radius r.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Good luck with that.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
???
I'm a mathematician, not an accountant.
My numbers don't lie.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
So you reckon you can make a square that is PRECISELY Pi.r along each side do you?
First, please give me the PRECISE value for pi.
(I am a physicist not a mathematician, the accounts came later as I realised that as a physicist, I would starve to death).
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
[My God, he hasn't even noticed]
The same value of pi is used for both calculations, ipso facto, I rest my case...
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
OK then, now go and construct it.
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Okidoki. Just send me the value of r and your construction of the circle I have to match it to.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry, that wasn't what was asked.
I merely stated you could not construct a square with the same are as a circle.
I had to google[^] but found this
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
What is obvious, but that you are ridiculously missing, is that every square you construct has the same area as a circle.
How many circles are there?
Um, that would be an infinite number.
Don't worry; it's one of those obvious points that everyone misses*, so you're not alone.
* That's not entirely true; I spotted it right away.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps the actual disagreement is because it is being discussed by an engineer (practical) and a mathematician (theoretical.)
In the first case the definition of "construct" means building a box in the real world.
In the second it is a point of proving that for a theoretical box and theoretical circle exists (provably.)
In terms of the engineer one might note that since the box cannot be built using 'precise' measurements then one cannot hold the same requirement for the circle. Further of course measuring the area of either is not 'precise' either for a real world example using actual measured values and not calculated.
|
|
|
|
|
Err Dave - it's a wind up. π(r<super>2)
|
|
|
|
|
SHH!
Spoilsport!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
The whole world knows that the PRECISE value of pi is 3.14
|
|
|
|
|
As any fule no π = 4
See Here[^]
---------------------------------
Obscurum per obscurius.
Ad astra per alas porci.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur .
|
|
|
|
|
Well thanks never knew you could do that, learnt something new today 
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
Hold on!
It's one thing leading DD up the garden path, but the equation is actually pi(r2) -- the bollocks I said earlier doesn't work; it was a heffalump trap.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I never actually googled what you put.
But "construct a square from pi.r" lead me to a few good examples and broke the pi(r2) down even further with some good explainations 
Every day, thousands of innocent plants are killed by vegetarians.
Help end the violence EAT BACON
|
|
|
|
|
 Seems this one might be too subtle for a lot of people.
|
|
|
|
|
A little humour is a dangerous thing, apparently.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Dalek Dave wrote: 11630 isn't very interesting.
12407 isn't very interesting.
... Until someone finally twigs that they're the key to Fermat's Theorem, or some-such.
Now you apologise to 11630 and 12407, Davey, and play nicely.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
