Brij Bhushan Vij wrote in USMA 24467:
Madan, Bill and friends:
I have had the oppertunity of examining most values for Pi used by man since (I could trace) and believe that *without defining Pi or 'radian'* the sign of equation for circle (=2 Pi radians) is incomplete. The data, I worked is placed at:
http://the-light.com/cal/bbv_pi-radian.jpg
It may be observed that NO VALUE for Pi fits the above criteria, since all suffer from its *truncation limit* during its evaluation. My suggestion to use Pi=100000/31831 (exactly) had a run in computer (1973) and in 'decimal notation' repeat all by itself after 5244th decimal, over and over again. This fixes the value for Pi, and also fixes the value for 'Radian = 57.2958 degree'; to make the definition meaningful.
Regards,
Brij B. Vij TIME: to think Metric!<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<And Calendar too>
I was suspicious of this posting since I had always regarded pi as irrational. A favorite exercise for underused super-computers is adding a few hundred more digits to the value of pi. I have just referred to Hardy's "Pure Mathematics" where I found the following:"It has been shown (though the proof is long and difficult) that this number pi is not the root of any algebraic equation with integral coefficients,"
On page 382 of Hardy we find:
pi/4 = 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - ....
I believe that there are more-rapidly convergent series for pi, but I can't put my hands on them.
--
Joseph B. Reid
17 Glebe Road West
Toronto M5P 1C8 Telephone 416-486-6071
