Today I watched a Vihart video on how the proof that "pi is 4" is false. All she does in the video is show that pi isn't four for the diameters of perfect, and thereby (I'm assuming) entirely theoretical circles.
From this, you can gather that it's perfectly possible for imperfect circumferences to have diameters of twice 4r instead of twice pir. This is seen when measuring objects in motion, as objects travelling around a circumference take as much time to travel that distance as objects travelling straight take to travel 4 of the measure, with the circumference being of size 2pir. milesmathis.com/pi2.html Thoughts? Pic is unrelated.
Though I might be a little biased as OP. C'mon, lads, this will show us the way to the next frontier. It impacts orbital mechanics, and anything which involves real world circumferences.
Please respond, /sci. :'( Don't make my questions remain unanswered.
Brody Mitchell
THIS POST IS INTERESTING!!
>mfw /sci would rather answer questions about the ocean freezing in the winter
Sebastian Green
Wow, OP, your thread is really interesting. Here's a model of a static state universe, which proves the possibility of an infinite regress.
Man, aren't we all smart?
Easton Richardson
>1 IP if you're going to samefag at least don't make it so obvious, jesus
Chase Parker
Thanks for discussing my post mate.
I was trying to make sure my thread didn't get buried, if that wasn't obvious enough.
William Sanders
We need to answer important questions before all is jihad or jizya and the world ends.
Xavier Perez
You fucking left my thread mate.
God fucking damn it. Fuck meme posters who contribute nothing. This board and this website suck.
Dylan Young
don't put yourself on a high horse friend. your thread is pretty much on the same level, if not lower than 1 != 0.999... threads
>this board and thist website suck leave then, you faggot
David Brown
>your thread is pretty much on the same level, if not lower than 1 != 0.999... threads
It isn't though. 4 being used instead of pi in circumstances which require precision such as the study of objects in motion makes a huge impact in such fields.
The question detailed in my post can be meaningfully applied to the study of mathematics and science, unlike the example you provided.
Adam Brooks
>3 IPs Fuck off Miles.
Levi Price
>Fuck off Miles. Fuck you faggots. I suggest an interesting theory and I get fucking nothing.
Samefaging is over reacted to.
Carson James
Imperfect circles have circumferences of four.
Geometry is a theoretical field. Debate me. Discuss my post. I'm getting nothing from you.
I've provided thought provoking evidence that has been completely ignored. Do you lot just have a bias to certain topics?
Landon Williams
You cunts are all brainlets, prove me wrong.
Jordan Bennett
What exactly is wrong with my argument? It is applicable to physics. The theory is revolutionary.
Austin Garcia
The ball going through the curved tube is subject to more friction due to inertia making it press harder on the wall of the tube, that's why it goes slower.
/thread
Jose Richardson
You are wrong. I bet you don't even know anything about uniform convergence.
Brody Turner
>vihart
Easton James
>OP literally in tears begging for (you)'s
Jose Allen
you have to be a brainlet to believe something you can make an experiment to prove is false. pi=3,14159....
