The Last Digit of Pi is Zero?

[Kian]

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

Irrational numbers have no last digit. There is no argument.

 

[r_517]

pages turn so fast

 

[r_517]

gonna prove it:

suppose PI = 3.14159.....0 and 0 is its ending number. and there are n digits after the decimal point. then PI*10^n=314159...0, which is an integer.
so PI = 314159...0/10^n. this contradicts that it is an irrational number, which means it cannot be written in the form like a/b which a and b are both integers

 

[DaijoCube]

*actually, the value of pi changes, so perhaps once in a while it would be a rational number*

Well we can't, but it is possible to know what will be the sequence of the last solve...

Uh, logic fail?
How in the world is it possible to know the sequence of the last solve? There are literally an infinite number of solutions to any given scramble of a rubik's cube, and you don't even know WHEN the last solve will be!

i believe that it's just a play on word.

It is not.

If we are only made of matter and there is no other force than does made by the matter, then everything is predictable.

 

[miniGOINGS]

*actually, the value of pi changes, so perhaps once in a while it would be a rational number*

Pi, the mathimatical constant, changes?

 

[Cyrus C.]

There are literally an infinite number of solutions to any given scramble of a rubik's cube

Are there, excluding using stuff like (R R')x y?

 

[DaijoCube]

*actually, the value of pi changes, so perhaps once in a while it would be a rational number*

Pi, the mathimatical constant, changes?

LOL at daniel, that was a cute thought

 

[CuBeOrDiE]

10 is not a digit

lol?

 

[miniGOINGS]

10 is not a digit

lol?

Or you could just go back to the other thread because you have absolutely no idea what this one is about. Please read my other posts about "10".

 

[r_517]

add to my prove at #44:

PI has already been proved as irrational many years ago, and there r many ways to prove it as long as u learned a bit calculus.

 

[LewisJ]

There are literally an infinite number of solutions to any given scramble of a rubik's cube

Are there, excluding using stuff like (R R')x y?

Sure. Scramble a cube, then turn it however the hell you please for however long you please and then start solving it. That was a solution to the scramble.

Daijo, us being made of matter does not make everything predictable to the point that you can say what the last solve of a rubik's cube ever will be. I'm not even going to bother arguing this one with you, anyone who has had HS physics knows how ridiculous your claim is.

 

[~Phoenix Death~]

Like everyone says, it's irrational. Sides, take 2.3. Add a 0. 2.30. Doesn't really change the value at all. the 'last' (there isn't) value might as well be 00000000000000.

 

[DaijoCube]

There are literally an infinite number of solutions to any given scramble of a rubik's cube

Are there, excluding using stuff like (R R')x y?

Sure. Scramble a cube, then turn it however the hell you please for however long you please and then start solving it. That was a solution to the scramble.

Daijo, us being made of matter does not make everything predictable to the point that you can say what the last solve of a rubik's cube ever will be. I'm not even going to bother arguing this one with you, anyone who has had HS physics knows how ridiculous your claim is.

There is not a time where the sum of all forces won't be equal to the mass times the acceleration. I want to argue on this, but you must let your judgment aside. I'm in pure sciences and I love maths and physics over all other classes. I'm not saying that because I don't know anything.

 

[Diniz]

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...).

Pi can't have a last digit because its Irrational, if he had a last digit it would exist a rational representation of him.

I never heard of a Gauss proof on this problem, but the 2 proofs i know end up in a much more complex (Lambert proof using continued fractions and Cartwright proof using polynomials and an well constructed recursive integral).

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

 

[r_517]

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...).

Pi can't have a last digit because its Irrational, if he had a last digit it would exist a rational representation of him.

I never heard of a Gauss proof on this problem, but the 2 proofs i know end up in a much more complex (Lambert proof using continued fractions and Cartwright proof using polynomials and an well constructed recursive integral).

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

yep Lambert made his proof in 18 century which was an awesome discover at that time

 

[koreancuber]

Off topic : This is the fastest growing thread I've EVER seen. I the number of new posts: 170. I look at the thread numbers, 5. Lol. How can you know the last number when you don't know it?

 

[miniGOINGS]

Off topic : This is the fastest growing thread I've EVER seen. I the number of new posts: 170. I look at the thread numbers, 5. Lol. How can you know the last number when you don't know it?

I actually think the Healthcare thread is a little bit faster than this, but yea.

 

[Stefan]

n = all the other digits of pi

n is not finite, n is impossible to define in this case

Um... you *did* define it right there.

 

[koreancuber]

Off topic : This is the fastest growing thread I've EVER seen. I the number of new posts: 170. I look at the thread numbers, 5. Lol. How can you know the last number when you don't know it?

I actually think the Healthcare thread is a little bit faster than this, but yea.

I was about to mention that also. These two threads have been causing the thread replies to grow exponentially. Every single minute a replie comes in, making me have to read the reply. I wish there was a thread ignorer. (or something like that)

 

[LewisJ]

There are literally an infinite number of solutions to any given scramble of a rubik's cube

Are there, excluding using stuff like (R R')x y?

Sure. Scramble a cube, then turn it however the hell you please for however long you please and then start solving it. That was a solution to the scramble.

Daijo, us being made of matter does not make everything predictable to the point that you can say what the last solve of a rubik's cube ever will be. I'm not even going to bother arguing this one with you, anyone who has had HS physics knows how ridiculous your claim is.

There is not a time where the sum of all forces won't be equal to the mass times the acceleration. I want to argue on this, but you must let your judgment aside. I'm in pure sciences and I love maths and physics over all other classes. I'm not saying that because I don't know anything.

Newton's second law has nothing to do with time (other than that a = d/dt v), which is in theory infinite, and thus, we do not know when the last solve of a rubik's cube will occur. In a less theory-based thought process, consider this: If I pick up a rubik's cube - completely ignoring the time issue - what calculations, simulations, or analyses can you do to predict the entire move sequence I will use to solve it?