The magic and mystery of "pi" | Real numbers and limits Math Foundations 93 | N J Wildberger

[@davenavy9960]

goatee Wildberger cannot be stopped, way to powerful!

[@basilrex4105]

Dr Wildberger's lecture has opened up a new dimension in my thinking.

[@fcvgarcia]

Thank you, sir! I have been struggling with the idea of pi for many months and every time I fell into a trap of circular (litterally) reasoning. Now I can see why it happens. Best regards!

[@farhanshams7286]

I personally appreciate your effort mr. Wildberger! Thanks for your valuable time and efforts.

[@kofi-tawiahagyeman]

God bless you soo much for your efforts and devotion to educating the world freely. You are my hero

[@Tadesan]

Lol god

[@Goloso333]

I want to thank you very much for the valuable information you have exposed in your video. I am fascinated by your knowledge. Please take care of your health, and keep up with your good job. Lenin

[@njwildberger]

Lenin Carrion Thanks Lenin.

[@nashaatal-jawabrah7672]

Dear Sir , It happened that I have watched MF93 today 6/10/2014 . I want by this to congratulate you for your precious efforts and simple techniques you are using in presenting your distinguishable ideas . I am in total agreement with your opinions about PI and your expected better future explanation . The different quantum mechanics used to quantify the magnitude of PI were never convincing me . In my opinion there is one relation exist between PI ,Square root of 2 and square root of 3 that we should look at ! Here is the equation : PI = Square root (3) + Square Root (2)..................... ( A ) And this implies the following : (PI) + (1/PI ) = 2 x Square root (3). ( PI X PI )+ 1/ ( PI X PI ) = 10 If we are going to assume any magnitude for any of the above three irrationals ( i.e PI , Sqrt (2) and Sqrt (3) ,then the magnitude of the other two irrationals need to be interlocked and calculated through equation ( A ) which is not the case now were every irrational was estimated independently which increases more our uncertainty and distort more quantum accuracy. I hope to find the above in the same direction and I am looking forward to her from you . Best regards, [e-mail] or gmail.com

[@SidneySilvaCarnavaleney]

Dear Sirs Academics (as) and students (as) In the present era Mr Sidney Silva reports with complete truthfulness that the number of "PI" is no longer Irrational, today it is a rational number, made the fraction and 100% to be exact calculations of Modern Mathematics, some time ago I published a video telling all my great discovery (PI" great discovery), and put on my Facebook page, "A Shot in The Dark"?!, is there who do a tour will see all my "Thesis" in relationship to this great discovery, it will be wonderful to meet all visiting my page, my heartfelt hug Mr Sidney Silva.

[@user-gl1kq7si5y]

Let me tell you something, PI is equal to 3.142696805... this is the square root of 2 times 2.22222..... this value for PI is more accurate than the one commmonly accepted . Please try this value for calculating the area of a circle or the circumference and you will notice is possible to square a circle. For example for a circle with diameter equal to the square root of 162 the circumference is exactly 40.

[@bendavis2234]

Thanks for the illuminating video! After finishing, I have one nagging question. If we went back in time, say 100 years, would our current value of pi with over a trillion decimal places still be said to “exist” as a more accurate version of pi? Similarly, if we find a much more expansive approximation for pi in the future, could it be said to “exist” now even though no one has found it yet? This might be a variation of the question, “is math created or discovered”, but I’m very curious on your take! Thanks for the thought provoking content!

[@lemer1463]

this is the video i was searching for. Thank you.

[@Freakofnature829]

Sir, thank for an awesome lecture! Really an eyeopener beyond anything I've seen in a long time. Thank you very much it made my day so much better!

[@engramos4097]

I love this series. They are amazing.

[@venetiansunrise481]

Loved every minute. You are so clear!

[@JohnChubbSr]

Fascinating and mind blowing! For some reason this makes me realize more that God does in fact exist.

[@Redshift666]

He doesn't, it's all mind, we are mental entities that are necessary for matter to exist, everything is energy that is expressed mathematically, the formula that represents our minds and its processes is eulers formula, with this equation and Fourier transformation, we can create an entire universe, there are multiple of us every human is a mind or monad, every animal and single cell organism, mind is necessary for existence and Matter is a necessary tool for evolution through this game of life, in your dreams you can create entire worlds! This is a function that is natural to our minds, the imagination, we can literally through mathematical processes do anything and create every math form, even when we speak we speak in a mathematical language, this view of living math is called ontological mathematics or real mathematics, sacred geometry is an example of this, and I guess it can be called God but then that includes you and I as God as well, we are God's we are responsible for this planet and its future we are the ones who know we aren't servants. Ad astra friend.

[@prabhueins1]

loved you lecture...... opened up a new thought process in my mind......

[@thegreatdesignbook3927]

After reviewing your video on geometric Pi, I think you may find this information on mathematically calculating the accurate value of geometric Pi interesting. The mathematical proof of the accurate value of Pi is: applying the equation, "inverse sin delta theta radians = Pi x theta degrees/6y" where: 1. delta theta is 1/12 of 2 x Pi radians; 2. theta degrees is 1/12 of 360 degrees = 30 degrees 3. and 'y' is 0.5. When the value of Pi = 3.141592654 is applied to this equation, inverse sin 0.523598778 = 3.141592654 x 30 degrees/(6 x 0.5) 31.57396133 degrees = 94.24777961 degrees/3 31.57396133 degrees = 31.415926654 degrees the left hand side of the equation is not equal to the right hand side. Now when Pi is three (3.0), note the answer: inverse sin 0.5 = 3.0 x 30/(6 x 0.5) 30 degrees = 90/3 30 degrees = 30 degrees the left hand side of the equation IS EQUAL to the right hand side. This demonstrates that Pi is 3.0. It is also interesting to note that above equation is precisely accurate at 1/12 of the circle at exactly 30 degrees. This information is written a book that explains and proves mathematically; and through a series of "real" life experiments that Pi is equal to three (3.0). The name of the book is "The Great Design Integration of the Cosmic, Atomic, Darmic (Dark Matter) Systems - VOLUME I GEOMETRIC Pi". You can download the PDF version of this book for FREE at www.thegreatdesignbook.com. The book consists of seven (7) volumes, and Volume I focuses on GEOMETRIC Pi.

[@mybluemars]

Amazing! Thank you for putting this together!

[@narendranathmahato80]

Fantastic teaching

[@aa697]

Great stuff!!!!!! Love it. Mathematics is my religion.

[@brendawilliams8062]

Thankyou

[@atinfinityplus]

Thank you. Each video is more fantastic than the next.

[@UTUBDZ]

Thanks you a lot for the video, very interesting and valuable.

[@faiznoredin7073]

Thank you for your explanation is very useful

[@firefly618]

Dear Prof. Wildberger, 　I still keep in the back of my mind the principle you espoused so succinctly in two pages of your book-I believe it was in the introduction. 　All of those "infinite formulas" for π are just algorithms, ones that happen to converge-however we wish to define such notion-and whose convergence "target" we call π, or some multiple of it. 　Therefore π is not a number, but a "target" of convergence for a-possibly infinite-class of algorithms. The same goes for curve lengths, curve areas, and other such integrals, in the general case: they are not numbers, but targets of convergence for algorithms. 　As you wrote, we are currently unable to prove in the general case whether any two such algorithms converge onto the same target (equality), let alone doing arithmetic with them. Therefore calling them numbers-a word with strong algebraic implications-feels dubious or at least premature. 　Given this, to have the gall of stating that all numbers (aka. rationals) plus all such "targets" (aka. computable irrationals) are an order of infinity beneath "real" numbers! That is a global, collective academic hallucination if I have ever seen one.

[@aa697]

How do you know if in fact it does ultimately repeats after we discover the next 10 trillion 50 decimal points? Then it becomes a "rational" number.

[@realityversusfiction9960]

Drawing A Circle The most commonly asked question when a person first makes use of a compass to draw a circle and then subdivide it, is, why is there bit left over?. And no matter how many times we measure or fiddle with the compass radius, we just can't seem to get rid of that extra bit. ​When we begin to draw a circle we begin by forcing the sharp tip of the compass down into the drawing surface, this action then in effect causes the radius of the compass to shorten, and the size of the circle to be slightly smaller. And when the circle is then subdivided, this same shortening of radius happens for each subdivision, leaving a little bit left over. Which is why the line of a circle never tells us the length of a circle, as the edge of a circle is its length, not the outer drawn line. More simply, a circle is a shape, and as with the moon we see at night, it has a shape as a silhouette, but not an outer-line. Diameter 120-centimeters Multiply by 3, the circle is 360 cm There are 360 degrees in a circle Each degree is one centimetre long www.fromthecircletothesphere.net

[@Xardy5806]

:D ...area of a circle with diameter 120 is by that "article" 10800 ... that person who was doing it is a bit nobrain .. by this result number Pi would be exactly 3 , which is utter BS ...

[@realityversusfiction9960]

Reply to Dunce Xardy5806 If You Cannot Reason And Think For Yourself - Go And Read Something Else CIRCLES A circle of itself is simply the visible edge of an area of round shape, just as the Sun is a silhouetted round shape against the blue of the sky, and the Moon is a silhouetted round shape against the black of the night. As such, all circles have a silhouetted area to their round shape, which extends outwards from the centre of their round shape to an equidistant distance - limit - edge from the centre of their round shape. Therefore, and although, round areas of shape do possess a circular length to their edge, they do not possess a circumferential outline. THE ROUND TABLE OF SQUARING THE CIRCLE Given a 120-centimeters Diameter Length 1. Multiply the 120-centimeters diameter by 3 2. The Circles length is 360-centimeters long 3. The Circles length is 360-degrees long 4. One Degree is 1-centimeter long 5. The Square of the 120-centimeters diameter is 480-centimeters 6. The Circles 360-centimeter length is three-quarters that of its 480-centimeter square perimeter Note: To All Mathematicians and Geometer's (And self-professed geniuses of the Social/TV media) That, if you are unable to disprove or negate the elementary arithmetic as presented above, and all of the elementary arithmetic and differential geometry that follows. Then it follows, that the differential geometry you are currently teaching is false, and you need to address your consciences (souls) and consider whether you value teaching that which you now know to be the truth, over and above that which you now know to be false. TWELVE STEPS TO THE VOLUME AND SURFACE AREA OF A SPHERE CUBE TO CYLINDER Calculating the surface area and volume of a 6-centimetre diameter sphere, obtained from a 6-centimetre cube. Note we use 6 centimetres rather than 120 cm, in order to make the numbers easier to follow. 1. Measure cube height to obtain a/its Diameter line = 6 cm 2. Multiply 6 cm x 6 cm to obtain the square area of one face of the cube; and also add them together to obtain the length of the perimeter to the square face = Length 24 cm, Square area 36 sq cm. 3. Multiply the square area, by the length of diameter line to obtain the cubic capacity = 216 cubic cm. 4. Divide the cubic capacity by 4, to obtain one-quarter of the cubic capacity of the cube = 54 cubic cm. 5. Multiply the one quarter cubic capacity by 3. to obtain the cubic capacity of the Cylinder = 162 cubic cm. 6. Multiply the area of one face of the cube by 6, to obtain the cubes surface area = 216 square cm. 7. Divide the cubes surface area by 4, to obtain one-quarter of the cubes surface area = 54 square cm. 8. Multiply the one quarter surface area of the cube by 3, to obtain the three quarter surface area of the Cylinder = 162 square cm. CYLINDER TO SPHERE 9. Divide the Cylinders cubic capacity by 4, to obtain one-quarter of the cubic capacity of the Cylinder = 40 & a half cubic cm. 10. Multiply the one quarter cubic capacity by 3, to obtain the three quarter cubic capacity of the Sphere = 121 & a half cubic cm, to the volume of the Sphere. 11. Divide the Cylinders surface are by 4, to obtain one-quarter of the surface area of the Cylinder = 40 & a half square cm. 12. Multiply the one quarter surface area by 3 to obtain the three quarter surface area of the Sphere = 121 & a half square cm, to the surface area of the Sphere. www.fromthecircletothesphere.net

[@Xardy5806]

1. Multiply the 120-centimeters diameter by 3 2. The Circles length is 360-centimeters long Do you seriously know what you did in point 1 ? So my question is why multiply by 3 ??? By radius of circle you can do perfect inscribed hexagon in that circle ... which means that the hexagon is 6 x radius ...or 3 x diameter ...inscribed hexagon is obviously shorter than circumference ... if you have radius 60 , perimeter of that hexagon will be 360 . Circle is longer obviously than 360 ... not as you stating in point 2 ...

[@EclecticSceptic]

I've been looking forward to this video for a long time!

[@dylanparker130]

brilliant video

[@bloodsucker3011]

thank very interesting - u give me inspiration, very helpful

[@bassammkeh]

Thanks professor njwildberger Pi = 22 Over 7

[@kansuerdem2799]

thanks.....you just gave me an idea..:)

[@jefersontorres]

Great video guy. I really thank you for sharing...

[@alijoueizadeh8477]

Thank you.

[@PedroAmaral1]

In your recurrence relation for (pi^2)/16 shouldn't the coefficient of the square root term be 2^(2n-2) instead of 2^n?

[@zeliangtang]

Very good！

[@pentalphastro]

I think circle (and any kind of curve) is not a 2or3dimentional object, but a 2d passing to 4d(time) hopping above the 3rd one. Explaining myself, circle doesnt fit in a 2d diagramme but....you make a 3d one (width,heigh,deph) it starts to seem like a sphere but also giving you the image of something in progress...but again not be fitted well. So i thing pi is the ryth(time) of change between the points in a straight line when you try to curve it...cause as Einstein proved, when the space is curved you get time effects,and it will go on and on because you have to stretch the gap between the points of line more and more but....without making the line bigger than when was a straight one.It shows in my eyes how fast(deep in the 4d) a 2d or a 3d obgect transforms to a 4d statical object. It is like an entropy effect with ice cubes in a glass of a water. Imagin the line as the cubes and the temprature of the water as the effect of curving the line...once they come together...the straight line wil be curved for good...there is no way back...pi is the ryth of the transformation, and you can never calculate back with accuracy. I see it like that, maybe a silly thought...

[@realityversusfiction9960]

All differential equations involving the formulae Pi π are infinitely irrational because you cannot equally divide a “Disproportionate - Irrational - Asymmetrical” amount into a “Proportional - Rational - Symmetrical” amount of anything. Observe a circular analogue clock face; there are 360 degrees of circumnavigation to one rotation of the hour hand, and 60 one-tenth degrees to one rotation of the second hand yielding a total of 3,600 one-tenth degrees to one hour. Question Given that all clock and watchmakers subdivide 360 degrees of a circle into a set number of equal lengths (Rational) parts, why is it that mathematicians and geometers cannot do the same? Answer You simply cannot subdivide a whole symmetrical unit, with an asymmetrical part. Or put another way, you cannot subdivide a whole rational unit, with an irrational part. Therefore as a circle is perfectly “Proportional - Rational - Symmetrical”, it is impossible to subdivide the length of a circle equally, using the number three + bit of a number. Pi π is an outline that lies proximate to the symmetrical - rational edge of a circle that is subsequently irrational (asymmetrical) because it cannot divide a circle's edge into an equal number of parts. The challenge to any and all mathematicians (Anyone): is to prove this simple arithmetic wrong, and if they cannot then they should take a watchmakers course and stop using Pi π. CIRCLE A circle's edge is perfectly rational having no beginning or ending, and it can be divided into any number of equal parts e.g. 360 degrees - 60 minutes - 3,600 seconds. THE LENGTH OF A CIRCLES EDGE Using a 120-centimetre length of diameter multiply this by 3 The circle's edge length is 360 cm long The circle's edge has 360 degrees of subdivision The circle's edge has 360 degrees and each degree is 1 centimetre long THE SUMERIAN METHOD - CALCULATING THE AREA OF A CIRCLE Using a 120-centimetre length of diameter multiply this by 3 The Circles Edge is 360 cm long 2. Multiply the 360 centimetres "Edge Length" by itself = 129, 600 square centimetres Divide 129, 600 by 12 = 10, 800 Square Centimetres to the Area of the Circle ARCHIMEDES: PROPOSITION The area of any circle is equal to a right-angled triangle in which one of the sides about the triangle is equal to the radius, and the other to the circumference of the circle. Archimedes Triangle The Circle in question has a 120-centimetre Diameter length The base right-angle is equal to the radius of 60 centimetres The area of the circle is equal to the right-angle triangle, which has one side that is equal to the 60-centimetre radius, and the other to the 360-centimetre circumference of the circle The 360-centimetre height of the right-angle is equal to 6 x the 60-centimetre radius length (1r) 60 centimetres x (6r) 360 centimetres yields 21, 600 square centimetres the area of the rectangle Half of the rectangle is 10, 800 square centimetres The area of the triangle is half of the 1r x 6r rectangle Half of the 1r x 6r rectangle is 1r x 3r (1r) 60 centimeters x (3r) 180 centimeters = 10, 800 square centimeters THREE TIMES THE RADIUS SQUARED The Diameter of the Circle is 120 centimetres The diameter x 120 centimetres gives, 14, 400 square centimetres to the square of the diameter The 60-centimetre radius x 60-centimetres yields 3, 600 square centimetres to the square of the radius The square of the radius x 3 gives, 10, 800 square centimetres to the area of the Circle SUMERIAN AREA: 10, 800 square centimetres ARCHIMEDEAN AREA 10, 800 square centimetres THREE TIMES THE RADIUS SQUARED AREA: 10, 800 square centimetres FOUR QUADRANTS 10,800 square centimetres Three Thousand Years Apart And Four Identical Results Is Not Coincidental THE AREAS OF RINGS Using An Eight Mile Diameter Right Angled Square (Or kilometres) Begin by first finding the area of each circle Multiply the 2-mile diameter of the central yellow circle by itself = 4 square miles to the square of the diameter, divide by 4 = 1 square mile x 3 = 3 square miles to the central circle. Multiply the 4-mile diameter of the red circle by itself = 16 square miles to the square of the diameter, divide by 4 = 4 square miles x 3 = 12 square miles to the red circle. Multiply the 6-mile diameter of the blue circle by itself = 36 square miles to the square of the diameter, divide by 4 = 9 square miles x 3 = 27 square miles to the blue circle. Multiply the 8-mile diameter of the green circle by itself = 64 square miles to the square of the diameter, divide by 4 = 16 square miles x 3 = 48 square miles to the green circle. Deduct the 3 square mile area of the central yellow circle from the 12 square mile area of the red circle; = 9 square miles to the area of the red ring. Deduct the 12 square mile area of the red circle from the 27 square mile area of the blue circle = 15 square miles to the area of the blue ring. Deduct the 27 square mile area of the blue circle from the 48 square mile area of the green circle = 21 square miles to the area of the green ring. Deducting the 48 square mile area of the green circle from the 64 square mile area of the overall pale blue square, = 16 square miles to the remaining area of the square, which is 1/4 of the area of the square of 64 square miles. Check Central Circle = 3 square miles Red Ring = 9 square miles Blue Ring = 15 square miles Green Ring = 21 square miles Pale Blue Area = 16 square miles + = 64 square miles TIME 360 Degrees to one equatorial circumnavigation of the Earth’s surface around its fixed core (diameter) = One Day. ONE DAY 360 degrees of one day divided by 24 = 15 degrees 15 degrees of one day multiplied by 24 = 360 degrees to one hour 360 degrees to one hour multiplied by 10 = 3, 600 seconds to one hour 3, 600 seconds of one hour divided by 60 = 60 seconds to one minute CHECK 60 Seconds x 60 = 3, 600 seconds = one hour One hour of 3, 600 seconds x 24 = 7, 200 seconds to one day 7, 200 seconds divide by 24 = one 15 degrees hour multiplied by 24 = 360 degrees to one day www.fromthecircletothesphere.net.

[@avinoamatzaba9853]

The ratio of circle to diameter varies according to the actual length of the diameter. For a diameter close to zero mm, the ratio is 3.164 For a diameter close to infinity mm, the ratio is 3.1416 See KZbin ... Pi Revolution...by Aetzbar

[@avinoamatzaba9853]

img2.timg.co.il/forums/2/2357afa1-c99d-4e2c-9979-41506e265a07.pdf

[@bigPianist99]

31.415 views :P