Hi Brij You wrote '√10 or Pi squared is also 10'
100000/31831 = 3.14159 and 3.14159 * 3.14159 = 9.86959 and it is nowhere near 10. Madan --- Brij Bhushan Vij <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: "Brij Bhushan Vij" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [USMA:24481] Re: Value of Pi As A Fraction > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 16:39:43 +0000 > > Hi Pat and all: > You are right 355/113 (from 113355 - just write the > first 3-digits in > denominator) is the approximation from China, which > is fairly accurate. Yet, > it does not FIX the value for arc-angle 'Radian', > which is (57�.2958 or > 57�17'44".88).This is fixed using Pi=100000/31831 > (3. > 14159 15302 69234 39414 40733 87578 14708 > .....etc.) > √10 or Pi squared is also 10. > Regards, > Brij B. Vij TIME: to think > Metric!<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > <And Calendar too> > > > > > > > >From: Pat Naughtin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Subject: [USMA:24478] Re: Value of Pi As A > Fraction > >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 19:03:21 +1100 > > > >Dear Brij, Joe, and All, > > > >I have always liked the approximation of � (pi) > that is 355/113 > >(3.141�592�9). I heard that this approximation is > ancient and comes from > >China, but I have never been able to confirm that. > I like it because it > >only > >uses the first three odd digits and it is more > accurate than 22/7. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Pat Naughtin LCAMS > >Geelong, Australia > > > >on 2003-01-17 02.14, Joseph B. Reid at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > 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. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months > FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
