How would math be different if we redefined 1 to be what we call pi, meaning it is not irrational...

How would math be different if we redefined 1 to be what we call pi, meaning it is not irrational? Would it make things easier or harder?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_geometry
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Harder? It's not much of an issue that pi is irrational.

But women are irrational and we all have trouble with them

>tfw my dick is 0.102/3.142 meters long by your definition.

By Pi do you mean the symbol itself or the abstract idea of the number Pi?

Because either way, it's pointless. 1Pi 2Pi 3Pi and so on. Everything is still defined in terms of the fundamental sequence of numbers.

It would make a circle's length equal to its diameter's length. Circles would fail to exist, and probably all dimensions above 1 would cease to exist.
>HURR IMPOSSIBLE HOW DOES IT WORK WITH LE RANDOM 3.14157783727
well, it is not random at all. It was discovered by humans and defined by the first big bang.

One of the most important properties of 1 is that 1*N=N for all N.

Redefining 1 to mean pi would break everything.

At that point you're just proving that numbers are arbitrary, or at least how we represent them.

I suppose a better way to put it would be that if the sequence 1,2,3,...n is redefined to mean pi,2pi,3pi...npi, then the element of the natural numbers previously known as 1 becomes an irrational constant necessary for most multiplication.

This would make math tedious.

Probably more error as well.

God, you're retarded. Fuck this garbage board.

That would make no sense. Pi is a ratio between two different lengths, 1 is the ratio between two identical lengths, they're fundamentally different.

el
oh
el

>brainlets

The abstract idea of pi. Like if instead of basing 1 of of counting 1 finger, we were completely circular organisms who defined the basic unit of math (1) off of the constant that was the ratio of our diameter to our circumference.

that has nothing to do with math. a meter is arbitrary. you can't define a ratio as a unit.

pi is only 3.14... because you know that 1 is 1

A meter is an arbitrary ratio of something to something, that's how all measurement is defined.

C/2r = 1

So now you've just got 1 except now its called pi. 1 is still 1 and pi is still pi.

No. What you call 1 is less than pi. What you call pi is 3.14...*1 to me

>What you call pi is 3.14...*1 to me

Oh my fucking god you're just validating my point. You've just changed the name, the actual fucking maths is the same except you call pi the word "one". You're still using the actual concept of "1" in your explanation. Alright, if one is pi, what do you call 1?

If you don't like irrationals, the "pi" in taxicab metric is 4.

1 to you is smaller than 1 to me, since my one is 3.14 to you.

So your 1 to me would be correspondingly less

Yeah its functionally exactly the same. You're basically just counting in radians.

That's the entire point. It makes math easier by making dealing with radians more intuitive by eliminating their irrationality.

>It makes math easier by making dealing with radians more intuitive by eliminating their irrationality.

It doesn't deal with the irrationality. Its still an irrational number because it can't be represented as the ratio of two integers.

I literally defined pi as the integer value 1.

Really sucks to be us, my good man.

When motion is involved, pi=4

No.

A meter is a dimension, whereas pi is a dimensionless value. Pi is inherent to all circles, whereas a meter is inherent to nothing.

It only makes maths easier in triginomitry and other areas with pi.

Every time you buy two chicken wins you don't want to have to say "oh I'll have 2/pi chicken wings" cus that'd be retarded. And when we do triginometry we basically already define 2pi as 1, saying that 2pi radians makes up a turn turn.

You use numbers that don't involve pi way more than you do, jesus this board is so dumb. It's like you guys that heard "pi is le irrational xddd" and think you are intellectuals talking about it and how 'solve' the 'problem' of it being irrational. What about e being irrational? What about sqrt2 being irrational? This 'solution' doesn't do anything for those very important numbers either.

all real numbers can be represented as a linear combination of 1 real number (trivial corollary of definition of a field)

however, this does not really do anything to the space, more like a meaningless change of basis. (1 dim space).

all in all, an interesting thought, but it really has more meaning in higher dimensional vector spaces. you could any read a book on linear algebra for a more in depth discussion on changing basis.

Cool shit, this is basically the answer OP is looking for. Anything that isn't just a meaningless reassignment has to change the actual geometry.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxicab_geometry

Well to be clear pi is still 3.1415..., but the "pi" for taxicab circles is 4.

My one is 3.14 to you, so what I call 3.14 is 3.14*3.14 to you

What is pi/pi in your number system? Its 1 isn't it. So you've not changed anything, you're doing is counting in terms of pi*x.

1/1 = 1
3.14/3.14 = 1
3.14^2 / 3.14 ^2 = 1 (or as you call it, pi)

>3.14^2 / 3.14 ^2 = 1

But that equals "what you call" 1, not pi.

3.14^2/3.14^2 = 3.14^2-2
3.14^2-2 = 3.14^0 which is 1 because anything to the power 0 is 1.

if pi is 1 then what is 2?

pi is 1
golden ratio is 2
e is 3
then the square roots of rational numbers?

Nah i'm actually 6 and a half inches. I was just pullin ur weiner bud.

Ok but now 1 is 1/pi, hence an irrational number