If π is an irrational number, how can circles exist?

File: 84 KB, 2000x2000, 2000px-Circle_-_black_simple.svg.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:24:39 2015 No.7126308 [Reply] [Original]

If π is an irrational number, how can circles exist?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:27:04 2015 No.7126310 they don't.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:29:37 2015 No.7126315 >>7126308 What does one have to do with the other?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:33:36 2015 No.7126323 File: 16 KB, 476x182, how-can-mirrors-be-real-if-our-eyes-arent-real[1].png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7126308

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:34:19 2015 No.7126326 >>7126308 How Can Circles Be Real If Our Pis Aren't Rational?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 18:40:25 2015 No.7126346 >>7126308 If imaginary numbers don't exist how can AC work.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 22:54:25 2015 No.7126764 >>7126308 there's no such thing as a true circle, when a shape exceeds a number of sides too great for the human eye to see, we perceive it as a circle

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 22:56:08 2015 No.7126767 >>7126308 has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?!

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 22:59:09 2015 No.7126773 >>7126764 what shape? how can you tell how many sides it has? does it have any sides? how can we tell whether it is a circle when there is no such a thing as true circle for a reference? phaggit.

Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:02:37 2015 No.7126781
File: 12 KB, 200x242, diophantus.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7126308
Consider that numbers are an arbitrary way of explaining nature. We have a system that works in most cases, but suppose nature just doesn't give a shit.

Diophantine equations are interesting, because we only care about solutions in Z. There is no limit to the number of solutions if you open it up to R.

>we try to explain things the best we can
>we don't know shit

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:11:01 2015 No.7126797 >>7126315 circumference = 2pi*radius If pi is irrational, then either the radius or the circumference also has to be.

Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:40:55 2015 No.7126863

Question:

wouldn't irrational numbers get to a point were they are so specific that digits start to not matter?

by "not matter" I mean couldn't possibly effect anything if they were expressed in any way because the observable universe is finite and irrational numbers are specific down to an infinite level.

does that mean irrational numbers can't exist?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:44:06 2015 No.7126870 >>7126863 Read few first chapters of Penrose's "Road to Reality"

Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:48:02 2015 No.7126877

>>7126863
>wouldn't irrational numbers get to a point were they are so specific that digits start to not matter?
Yes, but only because of arbitrary limits on our own precision.
>by "not matter" I mean couldn't possibly effect anything if they were expressed in any way because the observable universe is finite and irrational numbers are specific down to an infinite level.
What place value would cease to matter?
>does that mean irrational numbers can't exist?
No, it just means that our understanding of them is limited by our own perception.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:49:02 2015 No.7126884 >>7126310 You are correct. Unless I take you to court over it. Then you will pay me.

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:51:11 2015 No.7126887 >>7126884 But what about the diagonal of the square? Doesn't that have length sqrt(2)? Don't squares exist?

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:51:25 2015 No.7126889 File: 85 KB, 500x600, Jaden-Smith.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7126310 >>7126308

>>	Anonymous Thu Mar 12 23:52:47 2015 No.7126890 >>7126887 the word exist is ambiguous.

Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:12:47 2015 No.7126929
File: 37 KB, 460x276, The--international-protot-007[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>7126308
>>7126797
What about irrationals ban them from existing in some way?

Take a lump of metal. Any will do. Compare it to The (International Prototype) Kilogram. If matter didn't consist of clean multiples of subatomic particles, there would be no reason to suppose that your lump of metal would have a rational fraction of The Kilogram's mass.

The subatomic particle caveat is needed to have a real discussion about it. Stopping thinking about OP's question because 'any circle in real life won't be perfectly round' isn't an answer. It's lazy.

Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:12:47 2015 No.7126930

>>7126877

> What place value would cease to matter?

Don't know, i'm just asking if anybody knows whether or not this place value exists

> No, it just means that our understanding of them is limited by our own perception.

if perception "is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information" we are not limited by our own perception. We can assume that things like photons and quarks exist only because other information points to them existing.

I'm suggesting that irrational numbers are completely abstract because if i were to define the mass of something with an irrational number, it would be more specific than the lightest particle in the universe and if i were to define a position using an irrational number it would be more specific than the smallest particle in the universe, etc.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:14:49 2015 No.7126934 File: 3 KB, 616x129, bb2525440fab805b52848bde8a9195da.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7126308 Pi is only irrational as a base-ten decimal, pis related has a definite pattern.

>>	OP Fri Mar 13 00:37:52 2015 No.7126964 >>7126308 Also, why didn't they just make the year an even number of days? What is this 365.25 bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:55:05 2015 No.7126979 >>7126934 But that's wrong you idiot

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:56:05 2015 No.7126980 >>7126979 :0

Anonymous Fri Mar 13 00:58:31 2015 No.7126981

>>7126964
Because the earth takes 365 and a quarter days to make a full circle around the sun, moron; we call that cycle "year", and if you arbitrarily assign any other value of days to it, our calendar would get WAY out of sync (something along the lines of spring starting in October)

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:10:06 2015 No.7126991 >>7126308 Perfect circles don't exist outside of theory. We can get pretty damn close though.

Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:22:25 2015 No.7127001
File: 6 KB, 226x166, 1275705463552.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Isn't there an idea that perfect circles really don't exist, but are just a shape with an infinite amount of vertexes? It makes sense if you really think about it, because at a microscopic level, are surfaces ever really smooth?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:27:59 2015 No.7127006 >>7126964 The French tried to make a decimal calendar and clock, but it didn't really work because astronomy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:31:29 2015 No.7127010 >>7126991 They do exist, we can't necessarily draw them (or draw a perfect anything) but the shape does exist. It doesn't have to have a physical manifestation, but there is a circle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:33:35 2015 No.7127013 >>7126326 >>7126323 shit, beat me to it fuck you 4chan you made me an unoriginal meme spouter

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:42:14 2015 No.7127020 >>7127010 Go away, wide boy.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:43:11 2015 No.7127022 >>7126308 check and mate atheists

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 01:47:40 2015 No.7127028 File: 6 KB, 250x177, 1418171509518s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7127001 do surfaces even exist

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:00:27 2015 No.7127044 >>7127020 What?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:03:16 2015 No.7127048 >>7127010 That's the exact same thing he was saying. They're only concepts.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:06:42 2015 No.7127052 >>7127048 No, they exist, we just can't create them. Let's say I have a piece of paper, it contains a circle, not marked in anyway, but their is a circle in it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:07:55 2015 No.7127053 >>7127010 They don't exist in the physical world. Even if we had the ability to use an xth amount of carbons to form a circle, unless that x was infinite, that circle would still be an imperfect circle.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:10:50 2015 No.7127054 >>7127053 Only if you think spacetime is discrete

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:12:39 2015 No.7127055 >>7127052 Not him. Is it perfect on the atomic level? No, of course not. That's impossible. Perfect circles exist only in theory.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:13:39 2015 No.7127057 >>7127054 What does spacetime have to do with the concept of circles in the physical world?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:13:41 2015 No.7127058 >>7127055 As a defined set of points, it exists, not all those points would be the paper atoms, but they are there.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:15:29 2015 No.7127059 >>7127058 ...lol Then why even use the paper argument if you're still describing something entirely conceptual.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:15:38 2015 No.7127060 >>7127058 Design a perfect circle with a finite set of points for me then.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:17:46 2015 No.7127062 >>7127059 Just for reference. >>7127060 Space isn't discrete, so why should I be limited to a finite set of points? And the I'd just use the equation for it. It would contain all the points for you.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:19:12 2015 No.7127063 >>7127062 >space isn't discrete Are you saying that the speed of light is incorrect?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:21:14 2015 No.7127067 >>7127063 No, doesn't make space discrete

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:22:40 2015 No.7127068 >>7127067 Explain why you think perfect circles exist in a finite space.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:26:36 2015 No.7127071 File: 154 KB, 625x538, neildagrass.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7127068 Why not?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:27:34 2015 No.7127073 >>7127071 Because it makes zero sense.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:31:21 2015 No.7127075 >>7127073 Idk, I know shit about higher math, I'm just high and trolling. But seriously though, circles exist, you just can't directly interact with them

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:33:49 2015 No.7127076 >>7127075 you're a madman

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:39:40 2015 No.7127079 >>7126308 Then squares shouldn't exist either as their side or diagonal is irratipnal, do they?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:41:48 2015 No.7127080 >>7127079 Irrational but not transcendent >>7127076 It's hard to conceptualize, but what we can physically create isn't the be all end all of space time.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:47:15 2015 No.7127085 >>7127080 Have you been to the other side?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:48:13 2015 No.7127088 >>7127075 >you just can't directly interact with them There you go, exactly. Congats stoner, you've come to the correct conclusion.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:51:14 2015 No.7127090 File: 2.11 MB, 500x260, dealwithit-owl.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7126308 >If π is an irrational number it's not a matter of "if", faggot π is an irrational number, deal with it

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 02:52:22 2015 No.7127092 File: 146 KB, 1000x852, quentinclass.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7127088 I never denied it

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 04:58:13 2015 No.7127220 File: 6 KB, 439x432, CIRCLE~5.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7126308

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 05:39:30 2015 No.7127257 >>7126308 The circles are female, and—much like the complex plane—they require you to be familiar with the imaginary.

Anonymous Fri Mar 13 07:41:37 2015 No.7127333

>>7127068

>perfect circles exits
>a perfect circle has an infinite number of points which make it up
>a perfect circle exist in a finite space

chose two

The space it's actually not finite, even if you set some boundaries. A set point doesn't occupies a space, so once it has been defined, you can "zoom in" and in that point there you will be able to define a infinite number of points. Therefore it does't matter how small you go, you will not run out off space to define a circle.

It isn't that perfect circles don't exist in a finite space, but that finite space doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 07:42:54 2015 No.7127336 btw I am >>7127333 and I am not >>7127071

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 07:47:09 2015 No.7127340 >>7127257 being a d/ic/k, and using more round lines when I want to define female features, I can confirm this

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 07:50:15 2015 No.7127342 >>7126308 If pi is a rational number, how can circles exist?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 08:40:12 2015 No.7127376 >>7127342 Yeah, shit like fractions also don't exist

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 08:46:59 2015 No.7127384 >>7126797 >if pi is irrational, then either the radius or the circumference also has to be Obviously. But so what? And what if I told you you could say the same thing about any shape, eg with a square's side and is diagonal?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 09:56:30 2015 No.7127446 >>7126308 if -1 is negative, how can debts exist?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 16:26:16 2015 No.7127951 >>7126308 Real numbers don't exist, therefore circles don't exist.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 16:26:47 2015 No.7127954 >>7127951 >implying any numbers "exist" enough with this meme

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 16:34:34 2015 No.7127970 >>7127951 The numbers on my pay cheque exists faggot. brb, gota swim in my 300k from last year.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 16:36:59 2015 No.7127973 All circles are approximations.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 18:44:51 2015 No.7128223 >>7127333 How can these trips be real if this thread isn't real.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 18:48:15 2015 No.7128235 >>7126308 Just think of conception OP Also >muh fractals

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 18:49:49 2015 No.7128237 >>7126308 Pi is just a ratio. actual circles aren't all the same and are not always 3.14.... times greater in circumference than diameter.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 18:55:21 2015 No.7128251 >>7126308 Circles don't really exist, you know. They are an abstract concept.

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 18:56:21 2015 No.7128255 >>7127973 Are all lengths approximations? What are they approximations of?

>>	Anonymous Fri Mar 13 19:01:54 2015 No.7128265 >>7126346 AC being the axiom of choice? What are you talking about, idiot?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:08:09 2015 No.7128760 >>7128237 My diagnosis is autism.

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:12:32 2015 No.7128766

>>7126308
>If π is an irrational number, how can circles exist?
i do not follow.
your questions makes no sense for two reasons:
a) apparently the name "irrational" makes you assume it is not "rational" in the sense of "smart" but that is not what irrational means in this case (which means it cannot be expressed as a ration of two integers)
b) you apparently do not distinguish between the mathematical "world" and the real one.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:22:30 2015 No.7128784 >>7126797 what about radius = n/p for some n \in \mathbb{N}?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:22:45 2015 No.7128785 >/sci/ - Science & Math

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:50:18 2015 No.7128826 >>7126308 >If π is an irrational number, how can circles exist? >74 replies /sci/, I am disappoint

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:53:16 2015 No.7128829

>>7126308

I think it is becasue when the Universe was created in the big bang there had to first be a first dimension which existed just a bit before the second dimension came into existence. This first dimension expanded and then the second dimenension popped into existence on top of something that was already there and so everything after got pretty much bent out of shape. Hence circles.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 00:56:24 2015 No.7128832 >>7126310 Only correct answer itt

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:02:04 2015 No.7128842 >>7128832 ...indeed, in fact no geometrical shape actually exists outside theory. Not a square, not a line or even a point. So it begins...

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:06:40 2015 No.7128850 File: 101 KB, 411x387, 1423600546950.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>7128842 Our world is an ilusion Anon Oh my fucking god holy shit

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:09:13 2015 No.7128858 >>7126934 Rational means it can be represented as a fraction of integers. What does that have to do with decimal expansions?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:14:39 2015 No.7128864 Does a single point exist? Matter cannot represent a point, just as it cannot represent the smoothness of a circle. The shape exists as a concept without they're being any rocks or penises that are shaped like that shape.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:24:06 2015 No.7128871 >>7126310 they do.

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:33:20 2015 No.7128883

>>7128871
Check out this survey Dave Chalmers did of philosophy faculty. They have no idea either.
http://philpapers.org/archive/BOUWDP

Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism?
Platonism 39.3±1.3% Accept (19.8%), Lean toward (19.5%)
Nominalism 37.7±1.3% Lean toward (22.6%), Accept (15.1%)
Other 23.0±1.0% Agnostic/undecided (5.0%), Accept another alternative
(4.9%), Reject both (3.7%), Insufficiently familiar
with the issue (2.8%), Accept an intermediate
view (2.3%), The question is too unclear to answer (2.0%)

>>	vieta Sat Mar 14 01:48:00 2015 No.7128893 >>7127090 Bet you can't prove that it is.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 01:50:40 2015 No.7128897 >>7128883 >Chalmers my man.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 08:45:07 2015 No.7129225 File: 47 KB, 537x492, Compasses.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] CLEARLY no one itt has used one of these.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 09:48:49 2015 No.7129268 >>7127060 x^2+y^2=4

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 09:56:05 2015 No.7129280

I can think of 2 possible reasons:
1) Pi can't be expressed using a decimal base number system. That doesn't mean that the number is always changing or that it doesn't have a value, just that it can't be expressed using base ten.
2) Pi as a number approximates a perfect circle which never exists in reality.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 09:57:40 2015 No.7129282 >>7129280 >never exists in reality [citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:00:25 2015 No.7129285 >>7126773 from the definition of circle you idiot. there doesn't have to exist something for us to have a definition for it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:05:56 2015 No.7129293 >>7128826 welcome to the internet

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:07:54 2015 No.7129294 >>7129282 Okay, there you go, what in our universe is a perfect circle? Good luck.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:09:08 2015 No.7129296 >>7129294 That is not a citation, that is a cop-out. Want to try again?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:12:21 2015 No.7129299 >>7129296 Cancer

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:15:15 2015 No.7129300 >>7129282 That's like asking to prove i exists. It doesn't, we just have a definition to use in mathematical functions. What I meant was the pi is similar- it's a definition for a perfect circle that you can never actually get.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:15:49 2015 No.7129303 >>7126310 /thread why are you guys still talking

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:25:44 2015 No.7129315 Pie Day!

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:31:39 2015 No.7129325

>>7129300
the other guy made the claim, a positive claim, that there exists nowhere a perfect circle.

I think the problem is that none of the words are properly defined = "perfect circle" means what, exactly? And when we use irrational numbers because they fit, too.
At least someone mentioned that pi could be represented by a different number system and that our decimal system isn't the right one for measuring a "perfect" circle without any "bumps" caused by the number system's idiosyncrasies at extremes.

So I sort of agree with you but am just sayin you aren't taking it far enough. That's all.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:42:22 2015 No.7129340 There does not exist in the matrix of spacetime we live in, a physically manifested perfect circle/sphere.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:46:10 2015 No.7129350 >>7128265 AC = Alternating Current instead of using sin and cos you can use imaginary numbers to describe waves

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 10:46:49 2015 No.7129353 I swear to God this whole board is high

Anonymous Sat Mar 14 11:01:47 2015 No.7129371

>>7129340
Will someone define a perfect circle/sphere and then imagine some extreme phenomena where such a circle/sphere might actually exist?
Because perfection in math is just an extreme property, not some holy glowing religious thing.

How about in the immediate vicinity of a black hole or wormhole or something. Isn't it possible that something physical like energy or mass could form a circle or spherical shape that was mathematically perfect?
Am I hearing pooh-pooh noises in the back there? Speak up, I'm getting old and deaf here.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 12:33:24 2015 No.7129489 File: 1.06 MB, 1080x1920, Screenshot_2015-03-14-09-29-05.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >tfw got a picture right at 53 seconds and showed friends and family Feels goodman

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 13:38:59 2015 No.7129572 >>7129225 Why use a compass when we have GPS navigation now?

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 14:47:19 2015 No.7129729 >>7129371 Black holes does not exist nor perfect circles. because there alway gona be atomic imperfections

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 14:52:04 2015 No.7129742 >>7129489 Congratulations .

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 14:53:40 2015 No.7129749 >>7129353 /sigh/

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 15:20:30 2015 No.7129801 because τ is real.

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 16:39:41 2015 No.7129947 >>7129489 Should have done it at 54 seconds because that is a better approximation of <span class="math">\pi[/spoiler].

>>	Anonymous Sat Mar 14 19:37:42 2015 No.7130419 >>7128871 nah. A circle is an abstract concept.

Anonymous Sun Mar 15 14:32:07 2015 No.7132024

>>7126308
>If π is an irrational number, how can circles exist?

You seem to be suggesting that all of the geometric features of a circle (its radius, circumference, area, etc.) must always have measurements that can be exactly represented by rational numbers.

Why would you ever contemplate such a weird restriction? What purpose does that even serve?

But even more baffling: Why would you then assume that such a weird, arbitrary restriction must actually be true? And what caused you to arbitrarily pick the rational numbers as the only "correct" number system to use for measurement, rather than picking -- say -- the real numbers?

But here's where things get truly crazy: You actually seem to suggest that if you can imagine some circles that don't comply with your weird, speculative model -- then the only feasible explanation is that THOSE CIRCLES MUST NOT ACTUALLY EXIST!

For god's sake, man, get a grip on your sanity.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math