This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Serious posts are absent in the presence of an observer
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Wikipedia
http://www.wimp.com/clubhandle/
Post by
HighFive
(That Indian's got some hardcore moves.)
The "IT" in the forum page looks like a capital pi. This thread is now about pie and the number pi.
Did you know that although there is no reason to believe otherwise, it has not yet been proven whether pi is a
normal number
?
Post by
TheReal
I heard about some guy who wrote a Java program to compute every melody that was ever possible. Basically, he owns the copyrights to every song that hasn't already been written.
Post by
248766
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
HighFive
@TheRealArkayn: The set of all melodies is (I believe) uncountably infinite. As such, no algorithm is capable of enumerating all of them.
Even so, the program might have been able to compute a significantly dense (countably infinite) set of melodies, such that any other one, when heard by a human, would not be distinguishable from some melody in the set.
@pHishr: Prove it. :P
Post by
Wikipedia
Proving that pi doesn't follow a pattern is like proving 0.(9)!=1It would take an infinite amount of time.
Or it might have an end, but seeing the trouble we have with reaching those billion digits and yet no pattern found tells me something else...
edit,
This dude will hopefully be with us for a long time(read:tiem)!
http://youtu.be/2RYq5JyPqmA
Post by
Safturento
This dude will hopefully be with us for a long time(read:tiem)!
http://youtu.be/2RYq5JyPqmA
Sooo much better than the original..He should do a Lady Gaga remake.
edit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZA1NoOOoaNw
Old, but still funny as hell.
Post by
Wikipedia
HHAHAHHHHAHAHA
XD
However, I call you vid and raise you seriousness.
http://www.wimp.com/speaktypography/
Post by
HighFive
Proving that pi doesn't follow a pattern is like proving 0.(9)!=1It would take an infinite amount of time.
Actually 0.(9) does equal 1. No amount of time will yield a computation to the contrary.
What are you talking about?
Or it might have an end, but seeing the trouble we have with reaching those billion digits and yet no pattern found tells me something else...
If by "pattern" you mean, "representation as a repeating decimal", then no. It has been proven that no such pattern exists.
edit:HHAHAHHHHAHAHA
XD
However, I call you vid and raise you seriousness.
http://www.wimp.com/speaktypography/
That is like totally a good point to make on like talking, ya know?
Post by
Safturento
However, I call you vid and raise you seriousness.
http://www.wimp.com/speaktypography/
Haha, that guy is brilliant. I'm watching random videos of his on youtube now. :p
Anyone play Guild Wars? I'm so damn bored with wow that I've been working on my Hall of Monuments.. lol
Post by
Wikipedia
Haaaave you beeeen high todaaaaaay?
I loooooove you insiiiiiide meeeee
Post by
Safturento
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gg5_mlQOsUQ
Post by
Wikipedia
http://www.wimp.com/beengineer/
Post by
TheReal
@TheRealArkayn: The set of all melodies is (I believe) uncountably infinite. As such, no algorithm is capable of enumerating all of them.
Even so, the program might have been able to compute a significantly dense (countably infinite) set of melodies, such that any other one, when heard by a human, would not be distinguishable from some melody in the set.
I can't find a link, but I read it in a short article written by Quinn Norton in MaximumPC magazine. Basically, the set of notes and the orders in which they can be arranged is finite and is therefore computable. The number of combinations is somewhere in the trillions. Given enough time, computing power, and storage space, this guy will eventually have every possible melody computed. I guess technically he hasn't succeeded with his goal yet, but he'll eventually get there.
Post by
Wikipedia
Proving that pi doesn't follow a pattern is like proving 0.(9)!=1It would take an infinite amount of time.
Actually 0.(9) does equal 1. No amount of time will yield a computation to the contrary.
What are you talking about?
Not really, the difference just gets infinitly small. Now matter how many 9's you add you still need a 1 to fill up the gap.
Post by
HighFive
What if you add infinitely many, hmm?
You could philosophically argue that they are different, since they are written differently, but they do represent the same number.
Proof: x = 0.(9) // multiply both sides by 10
10x = 9.(9) // subtract x from left side and 0.(9) from right
9x = 9 // divide both sides by 9
x = 1 // Q.E.D.
You might like a more analytic look at things:0.(9) = 0 + 9/101 + 9/102 + 9/103 + ...
// This is the definition of the notation - a series.
// Also by definition, the value of the series is the following
lim n -> +inf Sn
// where
Sn = 9/101 + 9/102 + ... + 9/10n
// if such a limit exists.
// Such a limit
l
exists, if for any real positive number
e
,
// you can choose an integer
N
such that, for any integer
n > N
,
|Sn - l| < e
.
// In layman's terms, for some number, we can add enough nines, to
// get the partial sum as close as we want it to that number. (which is what you said :>)
I find this problem to be very similar to the following:
"Is the set of even prime numbers, equal to the set of integers n > 1, such that the equality xn + yn = zn holds for some whole x, y and z?"
The sets are equal - {2}, but the means of defining them are very different, and this problem couldn't even be answered before 1995.
Post by
Wikipedia
I familiar to the proof you present. However, I stand by what I said earlier: It gets infinitly close, but it never actually reaches 1.
Post by
HighFive
All right. Suppose that 0.(9) < 1. Then, since the set of real numbers is densely ordered, there exist infinitely many x's, such that 0.(9) < x < 1. Show me one such x.
Post by
Wikipedia
I can't, but it's a lil' like religion - you can't prove me wrong
:/
.
It's the same thing as 10/3 leaves you with 3.(3) which also - theoretically - shouldn't add up to 10 if multiplied 3 times.
Post by
HighFive
You, sir, are not a man of science. :\
In other news, I recently enjoyed watching
this
.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.