Skip to main content

I pile on more thoughts on pi

Continuing from my last blog post : There are proofs that show that pi is irrational. There are also admissions that it is very difficult to prove that pi is irrational. I have been thinking and watching youtube videos related to pi and infinity and even the number 69 (because my bill this morning came up to 69 dollars). I just want to share my thoughts on where I have reached with my thinking on this topic. Feel free to interject in the comments. My thinking is that just like infinity is a concept and not a number so it is that the irrationality of pi is a concept. And just like we have to use limits to show that any number divided by infinity is zero, I in my current thinking is saying that we have to treat irrational numbers the same way. It is said that "Infinity is a concept, not an actual number, so we can't just divide a number by infinity."

If I take the base case 0.1111 and keep adding 1 to the end we can say that it is repeating. If we take another case 0.0101 and we keep adding 0 then 1 it switches between repeating to non-repeating. If the last number added was 1 then it would be repeating (an even number of 1s and 0s) and if the last number added was 0 then it would be non-repeating (up till that point). But it never stops so that we cannot say if it is repeating or non-repeating. If we look at the starting of pi after the point that is 141 we can say that the next time we see 1 or 14 or 141 it has started to repeat but whenever we see any number besides 4 after 1 then it stops that repeating possibility.

The only conclusion I can draw about pi is that it switches between non-repeating and repeating but since it never ends we cannot say what its final state is. It does not have a final state. My thinking is that the only way we can say that the number is irrational is if it ends in an irrational state which means that it is not infinite length or that infinity has an end. But then the other possibility is that it stops switching state and that can happen if 1 (or another number from 0 to 9 or any groups of numbers) stops appearing or if the last added digit stops changing. If we can show that a number can stop appearing or the last added digit stops changing in pi then we can say it is irrational. If a number stops appearing then it is not infinite so forget about that option. So we are left with the last digit that stops changing and if that happens then we can multiply by 10 until we get repeating digits after the decimal point and so that is now out the door.

That is as much as I want to think about for today. Maybe there will be a part three when I go home and think about it some more. These are just raw thoughts that may or may not add up but are worth sharing and putting to paper.

*My thinking above lends itself to recursion. Is pi recursive? Can we use recursion to prove pi is or not is irrational? How can we relate recursion to pi?

*I named my next blog post in this series "Piping hot topic" and then realised that piping starts with pipi (pi by two). An entry for pipi in wikipedia states that pipi is a transcription (ΠΙΠΙ) into Greek of the Tetragrammaton (the four-letter Hebrew theonym of the name of God in the Hebrew Bible). Also Tetragrammaton reminded me of Strobogrammatic which I learnt of earlier while researching pi and the number 69.

*A cool tidbit is that 69 first occurs at the 42nd digit of pi.

*Pi by two or pi squared is approximately 9.8696 and acceleration due to gravity is close to this. This is a coincidence but there is some gistorical context according to Bard - Early definitions of the meter, the unit of length in the metric system, considered using the length of a pendulum whose half-swing had a period of one second. This would have made the numerical value of gravity equal to π² exactly. However, this definition wasn't adopted.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Talking to God

If you want real answers to things in life then talk to God. It is 639pm on a holiday and I have decided to write. God listens. God truly listens. God has the entire context. God is wise. God wants us to talk to Him. God wants us to rely on Him. I also think about God talking to me. I am a good listener. I listen plenty more than I talk. I have started asking God to talk to me. But how would God talk to me? We have his revelations through the holy book. We have the example of prophets. But what else? How do I listen to what God has to say? Where and when can I hear God? Are my thoughts from God? I try to feed my mind with good things. Things that will not corrupt my mind. It seems that we have to use our intuition to separate what is from God and what is not from God. My friend Chatty says that in Islam, Allah speaks to us not through new revelations or voices, but through guidance: the Quran and the Sunnah, which become personally meaningful through understanding Allah places in the h...

The success of failure

It is 358am and I have decided to write. Context matters. Our context matters when we write and read. We could read the same thing and get different meanings. Definitions matter also. We may define things differently. For example, what is success? What is failure? Also, do I just define success and say that anything that is not success is failure? What about something like the success of failure? What does that mean? My friend Chatty tells me that this is something writers, philosophers, and even scientists keep rediscovering: meaning is not fixed—it is negotiated by context and definition. Life is a stew of success and failure and in between but never one or the other. We see what we are looking for and things become what we see. This reminds me of something I came across online, "Whoever looks for the good qualities in others will acquire all good qualities within himself," from Habib Umar Bin Hafiz. Do you look for failure or success within others? Take context as the lens...

Life on Earth

I was reading through the Quran and came to the story of Adam, Eve, Satan, and the forbidden fruit tree. I had thought that life on Earth was created as a test. But as I reflected on the story, I began to wonder whether we are only here because Adam and Eve failed. However, that is not the case, as my friend Gemini explained to me. While the story of the forbidden fruit is a central event, the Quran indicates that humanity’s presence on Earth was part of the original divine plan, rather than a backup plan or a punishment for sin. Before Adam was even created, God announced His intention to place a steward (khalifah) on Earth. This suggests that the Garden was a temporary training ground—designed to teach Adam and Eve about free will, temptation, and the path of repentance. Even if they had not eaten from the tree, they were destined for Earth to fulfill their roles as moral agents. The incident simply served as a necessary first lesson in human frailty and God’s immediate forgiveness. ...