I need someone good with maths

So, i came across this thing that says you can resolve the number of pi if 1 equals 0.96. I know it sounds stupid, but i'm just curious and I'm pretty bad with maths, so how can i check this out?

 

What class is this?

 

It's not class, it's a dude who say time is 4 dimentional and stuff and that one is evil and wrong, in math and all . It's weird but interesting.

http://everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1084027

he's actually a living joke on the internet because of his website timecube.com, but what he's actually saying is interesting (but badly worded).

 

There's no such thing as evil math. Wrong math is where thing's don't balance out.

 

bah

 

What is the point in balancing pi when doing so would require you to throw out all other mathematical proofs?

 

It is because of pi that led us to what we are today.

 

When you assume an axiom like 0.96=1 pretty much anything is provable now (principle of explosion). In essense, by assuming a falsehood you can prove everything.

That's why it's good to define a good set of axioms in the first place.

 

The 4th dimensional time cube... that person is insane, don't waste your time.

 

http://www.timecube.com/

Rofl.....wow.

 

This like this is going to lead into a discussion of the movie "Pi".

 

haha wow. I came here to think up a witty joke or something and then I get sidetracked reading this.

not only is this guy crazy, hes kind of racist too.

 

Pi-nis.

 

This guy is a nutcase. There are numerous ways to prove that pi=3,14...
Example that can be done with most programming languages like Java,C,...:

Draw a square, now draw a quarter circle in it. Randomly put points on the square. Now to estimate pi: [the number of points that fall in the quarter circle (example 1965 points)] divided by [ the area of you square (example 50x50) divided by 4 (because it is a quarter circle) ]. The estimate with the example values would be 3.144

The bigger you draw the square and the more points you simulate, the closer you will get to pi.

 

Why not just round it down to its biblical value of three? That would make you much more righteous!

http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/aprilfool/comments/862/


... still, is there a way to understand four-dimensional or even more-dimensional mathematics without being a nutjob?

Nothing against cahaz, mind you, as I suck at math and would like to understand the stuff he's looking for. But this timecube fellow is quite a show.

 

>>the number of pi if 1 equals 0.96
Although the majority of people believing somethoing isn't always correct, this idea is wrong. c_rpg gave a good example. You can do it with grains of rice on paper b.t.w.

If you want a proof that 1=0.96 then substitute the number 2 for 0.96 below(I've kept it as 2 as it's easier to understand)

x=y
=> x+2y = y + 2x (just add same thing on both side)
=> x-y = 2x-2y (re-arrange terms)
=> 1(x-y) =2(x-y) (now cancel terms on both sides)
=> 1 = 2

If you substitute 2 for 0.96, you'll get 1=0.96

It's wrong obviously.......just showing a point that at first sometimes thing can seem valid, but looking closer it breaks down.

 

I guess in this case you just need to realize that x=y, so any number minus itself is 0. So, in canceling terms, you can't divide by 0.

 

Actually, you need to realize that you can't add 2x on one side of an equation and 2y on the other side, because then it won't be the same equation at all. If you add, for example, 2x on both sides, they can be cancelled out, so the equation won't change.

 

Trenton_net is correct...virtual gold star to you...

7Force ....the notation is a bit sutble here...I use the symbol '=>' which is read as 'implies'. This symbol doesn't imply the two equations are the same, just that from one you can imply the other. However both are still valid (at least the first two lines are)

If you add 2x on one side and 2y on the other then the equation still holds true. The reason is that x=y (i.e. they are the same), so adding 2x is the same as adding 2y, just a different variable.

This is all getting way too heavy for a games forum.....

 

theres the problem, but i just noticed drx explained it pretty good