The Last Digit of Pi is Zero?

[TioMario]

Pi in base pi is 1.0, so it's indeed 0, case closed. Or it's 1, your choice.

LOL win proof.

It is possible to use irrational bases right?

Logarithm...

\( Log b (a) = c <=> b^c = a \) / a>0 ; b>0 ; b≠1 ; c is a real number.

 

[blah]

I think Gauss, or I don't remember who demonstrated that if Pi was not irrational (it would end sometime) a pair number could be impair (or odd in english I think...).

Firstly, "not irrational" != "it would end sometime". 1/3 is rational but it never ends. Secondly, if Pi is not irrational, i.e. rational, then all monkeys can fly whenever Pi is rational.

Simple logic: \( \forall Q[\neg P \Rightarrow [P \Rightarrow Q]] \).

you're radical thinking is quite flawed. Adding arbitrary 0s to any number doesn't make it end in a 0. the number 2342313412349012340000000123412348974589234 ends in a 0 digit too, if you feel like adding 0s to the end of it. it can be done with any rational number, so there's no point in arguing this in the way you did.

Firstly, lolyoure. Secondly, 1/3.

O and i think Lambert proof was the first one and sub 1800

LOL.

Pi in base pi is 1.0, so it's indeed 0, case closed. Or it's 1, your choice.

LOL win proof.

It is possible to use irrational bases right?

Logarithm...

\( Log b (a) = c <=> b^c = a \) / a>0 ; b>0 ; b≠1 ; c is a real number.

Uruguay: not a good place for mathing.

 

[LewisJ]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

Learn2quantum

Did I miss a deleted post or something?

anyway, daijo you're again making the comparison between finite and infinite. Once you've predicted the future forever and ever and ever, you have to search through that infinite future for the LAST occurrence of a cube being solved. Simply impossible to do - one of the key ideas behind the word infinite.

 

[TioMario]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

What the...?
Mathematics isn't the same as physics, you can't use mathematics in the real world without using the physical laws. Now, what do you mean with
"every single event in the past and future"?

 

[LewisJ]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

What the...?
Mathematics isn't the same as physics, you can't use mathematics in the real world without using the physical laws. Now, what do you mean with
"every single event in the past and future"?

By knowing the elementary properties of every particle it is possible to predict collisions and the results of all those collisions; from there you can theoretically find what they all will do forever because they follow a set of laws. In this way you are using both math and physics.

 

[Stefan]

You're still assuming a deterministic universe. But ok, for the sake of argument, I'll give you that. Now how do you know that it's not determined that we'll never predict the future that way, thereby making it impossible?

 

[DaijoCube]

My opinion

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Spoiler

Pi goes on forever, so it does not actually end with any particular number.

There is no opinion in math.

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

Learn2quantum

Did I miss a deleted post or something?

anyway, daijo you're again making the comparison between finite and infinite. Once you've predicted the future forever and ever and ever, you have to search through that infinite future for the LAST occurrence of a cube being solved. Simply impossible to do - one of the key ideas behind the word infinite.

I say that humans won't be there for infinity, thus Rubiks could not be solved, but there could be multiples earthquakes making it move to its solved position...

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

What the...?
Mathematics isn't the same as physics, you can't use mathematics in the real world without using the physical laws. Now, what do you mean with
"every single event in the past and future"?

Physics are applied mathematics. What I mean is there is no randomness in the world. We might not be able to predict all, but all is predictable. All that happens, happened and will happen are a result of forces between masses. That is only true if there is no god and might be false if we do have a soul. If choice is not due to matter, then what I say is slightly false.

 

[DaijoCube]

You're still assuming a deterministic universe. But ok, for the sake of argument, I'll give you that. Now how do you know that it's not determined that we'll never predict the future that way, thereby making it impossible?

I thought about that, it made me doubt a lot. Matter can predict it's own behavior, which might **** this all up But when you think of it, if we predict events, it was ''obligated'' to happen. Therefore, our ability to predict is included, because it's a direct consequence of the ''initial data''.

This idea haunts me. Seriously.

 

[DaijoCube]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

What the...?
Mathematics isn't the same as physics, you can't use mathematics in the real world without using the physical laws. Now, what do you mean with
"every single event in the past and future"?

By knowing the elementary properties of every particle it is possible to predict collisions and the results of all those collisions; from there you can theoretically find what they all will do forever because they follow a set of laws. In this way you are using both math and physics.

I love when somebody gets it.

 

[JBCM627]

By knowing the elementary properties of every particle it is possible to predict collisions and the results of all those collisions; from there you can theoretically find what they all will do forever because they follow a set of laws. In this way you are using both math and physics.

I love when somebody gets it.

Unfortunately, Escher's post stands here: Learn2quantum. "Knowing the elementary properties of every particle" is physically impossible.

 

[TioMario]

Not really, math is just the tool for physics, but it's just that, you can't apply raw math anywhere.

And blah, please be more specific, tell me where my mistake was.

 

[DaijoCube]

Not really, math is just the tool for physics, but it's just that, you can't apply raw math anywhere.

And blah, please be more specific, tell me where my mistake was.

You can't apply raw math? I do understand the ambiguity here though.
But, this is not the point, at all

 

[Stefan]

There is no opinion in math.

Is zero a natural number?

there is no randomness in the world.

How do you know?

That is only true if there is no god and might be false if we do have a soul.

Uh... what?

 

[TioMario]

Not really, math is just the tool for physics, but it's just that, you can't apply raw math anywhere.

And blah, please be more specific, tell me where my mistake was.

You can't apply raw math? I do understand the ambiguity here though.
But, this is not the point, at all

Nope, the point is that PI is an irrational number, it has no last number and this thread is over

 

[mr. giggums]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

Learn2quantum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

 

[Stefan]

Nope, the point is that PI is an irrational number, it has no last number and this thread is over

If that were how things worked, you wouldn't have posted in this thread. You honestly thought you were the first to say that? On page 8?

 

[Deleted member 4527]

And blah, please be more specific, tell me where my mistake was.

My question was whether you can represent numbers in an irrational base such as base pi and your answer was to show how logarithms work. It was irrelevant to the question.

 

[DaijoCube]

Well, I might create a philosophical debate here. At a specific moment in time, if we could know the position, speed, acceleration, mass and nature of all particle in the Universe, it would be MATHEMATICALLY possible to calculate every single event in the past and future.

Learn2quantum

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle

I said WE, humans, cannot know. If we could know, everything could be predictable.

 

[DaijoCube]

There is no opinion in math.

Is zero a natural number?

there is no randomness in the world.

How do you know?

That is only true if there is no god and might be false if we do have a soul.

Uh... what?

1-You got me, as you always do

2-When you drop a ball, it'll fall. If you take the exact same conditions, it'll fall the exact same way.

3-If there would be a god that is omnipotent, it could interfere with this closed system that is our Universe. If we had something in us that is no matter and that has consciousness, then choice would not be the consequence of chemical and physical interaction, thus making my statement false.

 

[TioMario]

And blah, please be more specific, tell me where my mistake was.

My question was whether you can represent numbers in an irrational base such as base pi and your answer was to show how logarithms work. It was irrelevant to the question.

You mean a base pi numbering system?
If that is the question, the answer is yes.