Noah's flood real

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2639 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Every integer can be covered to decimal. Except one.
What this never occurred to you?
I'm curious what you think the exception is.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2640 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
You're not listing all of your figures.
This would be acceptable if you hadn't made the claim more less that no one else is allowed to round off Pi.
When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value.

But the exact value of pi is not required to answer the following question:

If a vat is 10 cubits across, how many cubits is it around? You can round off your answer to the nearest integer if you want.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2641 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
No kidding.
News flash I know Pi !
It is you and your clan that claim you can't round it off.
No, I am saying that rounding off inevitably produces an error into the calculation. The amount of error is determined by the amount you round off.

So, if a vat is 10 cubits across (diameter), how many cubits will it be around (circumference)? You may round off to the nearest integer if you wish.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2642 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
As well as I did when I said I'm round off to a whole number.
How much error is produced when you do this? In particular, if the diameter of a vat is 10 cubits, what is the error produced in the calculation of the circumference when you round pi t the nearest whole number?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2643 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>I generally just use the symbol pi.
As do most, while this works for writing down the equation. What number do use when calculating?

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2644 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>I'm curious what you think the exception is.
Pi

Langoliers

Since: Apr 12

Location hidden

#2645 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value.

But the exact value of pi is not required to answer the following question:

If a vat is 10 cubits across, how many cubits is it around? You can round off your answer to the nearest integer if you want.
"When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value. "

Oh that's so critical when you're measuring using a Cubit! Finger tip to elbow.

Hey Fred double check my measurements before I cut this board!

Hey bubba you're off by 1/64 of a cubit!

LOL

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2646 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
As do most, while this works for writing down the equation. What number do use when calculating?
It depends on how much accuracy I want.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2647 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Pi
Pi isn't an integer.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2648 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value. "
Oh that's so critical when you're measuring using a Cubit! Finger tip to elbow.
Hey Fred double check my measurements before I cut this board!
Hey bubba you're off by 1/64 of a cubit!
LOL
No, in that case, you are off by more than a cubit. Almost a cubit and a half.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2649 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
"When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value. "
Oh that's so critical when you're measuring using a Cubit! Finger tip to elbow.
Hey Fred double check my measurements before I cut this board!
Hey bubba you're off by 1/64 of a cubit!
LOL
Here's a question. Suppose you have that the diameter is 10 cubits. Suppose you want the circumference to be accurate to the nearest cubit. How accurate of a value of pi do you need to do this?

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#2650 Mar 1, 2013
Langoliers wrote:
<quoted text>
Pi
Do you even know what it means to be an integer? Seriously, do you think pi is an integer?

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2651 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I say that? But, if you round off, you won't get the exact value.
But the exact value of pi is not required to answer the following question:
If a vat is 10 cubits across, how many cubits is it around? You can round off your answer to the nearest integer if you want.
It is infinite cubits around it.

(Got that from your and IAnus' Infinite Donut Theory)

It works for anything round. Not sure why it doesn't work for something square...

I'll consult your partners and get back to you.

...Hey, Darwin's Dickhead...! If a donut is infinite length around it, how come a square,...say a PopTart...is not??

I hope I didn't just prompt a new theory - The Infinite Pop Tart Theory.

You never know with these "experts".

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2652 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you even know what it means to be an integer? Seriously, do you think pi is an integer?
Pi is not an integer.

It is also not a number.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2653 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Here's a question. Suppose you have that the diameter is 10 cubits. Suppose you want the circumference to be accurate to the nearest cubit. How accurate of a value of pi do you need to do this?
The nearest 10th.(.1)

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2655 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
Real numbers are *defined* as limits of rational numbers. I gave one particular limit (an infinite sum) that gives pi.
Yes, pi is an irrational number given by the infinite sum
4*(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 - 1/11 +...)
That infinite sum is exactly pi.
There is no such thing as an infinite sum.

There is no infinite anything.

It is possible, however, to IMAGINE an infinite sum, or an infinite anything.

That's why it's irrational.

Since: Mar 11

Scottsburg, IN

#2656 Mar 1, 2013
Uh oh sounds like chunky Buck is hungry! His lardass needs food! More food! Buck is the hungriest one there is!
Buck Crick wrote:
<quoted text>
It is infinite cubits around it.
(Got that from your and IAnus' Infinite Donut Theory)
It works for anything round. Not sure why it doesn't work for something square...
I'll consult your partners and get back to you.
...Hey, Darwin's Dickhead...! If a donut is infinite length around it, how come a square,...say a PopTart...is not??
I hope I didn't just prompt a new theory - The Infinite Pop Tart Theory.
You never know with these "experts".

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2657 Mar 1, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Keep waiting, cuntard.
4 *(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 ...) is pi. People were doing this in the 1600s. If you're thicker than people in the 1600s, keep complaining.
I can show you how to do the first thousand iterations in something as shabby as Excel if you really care.
More here: www.geom.uiuc.edu/~huberty/math5337/groupe/ex...
If you don't like pi not being exactly 3, go tell your god off for being so awkward.
<quoted text>
4 *(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 ...) is not pi.

It is two whole numbers, four fractions, an asterisk, open and close parentheses, three dots, two plus symbols, and two minus symbols.

There is nothing infinite there. It is very finite, proven by my being able to place it on this page in increments larger than zero.

(Something infinite would take a lot longer to write.)

This is Buck School. Welcome back.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2658 Mar 1, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Uh oh sounds like chunky Buck is hungry! His lardass needs food! More food! Buck is the hungriest one there is!
<quoted text>
Are you hungry, GiveMeLiverwurst?

Here...Pfffffffttttttttt!

Get 'em while they're hot.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#2659 Mar 1, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>
You should refrain from commenting on things you don't understand. Pi is a finite number that is represented by an infinite decimal expansion. Circles as well as lines have infinitely many points (in fact, uncountably infinitely many points).
No.

There is no infinite decimal expansion. There is no infinite anything. Circles do not have infinitely many points. They don't have ANY points.

A point is alleged to have zero diameter. No such thing exists.

If something does not exist, then a circle cannot have infinite many of them.

We can imagine an infinite many of something with 0 diameter. We can talk about it, laugh about it, calculate measurements as if it existed, but it does not exist.

Pick something,...anything,...that does exist, and you can place only a finite number of them on a circle - any circle.

This falsifies the Infinite Donut Theory, proving it is not an infinite distance around a donut.

This is Buck School. Have a seat in the back next to GiveMeLiverwurst.



Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 min Dogen 51,950
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 7 min Eagle 12 11,420
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 11 min scientia potentia... 24,794
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 14 min Eagle 12 22,135
News Quotes from Famous Freethinkers (Aug '12) 2 hr Trumpler 1,659
News Fox Friends Outraged Over Atheists 'Making Chri... 2 hr Ronald 205
The Dumbest Thing Posted by a Godbot (Jun '10) 9 hr Into The Night 5,805
More from around the web