Speed of light = Pi Ratio? My Math Says So.....

[The Light Barrier]

I can't believe you actually asked that question, do you really think I have nothing else better to do than to speak to strangers on line and waste time with arbitrary numbers and calculations? I have been on this since the age of 5. My functions have a flow to them, they follow the rules of precession. Another example:

 

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510 / 1313122.5390852564 = 0.00000239245962

 

log(0.00000239245962) = -5.6211553835236

 

1 / 10e5 = 0.000001

 

1 / 0.000001 = 1000000

 

1 / 1000000 = 0.000001

 

0.000001*12 = 0.000012

0.000012^2 = 1.44e-10

If there was a better reason for 12 *12 would this mean that there was an odd connection, or are all of the numbers just picked from thin air?

 

WELL BARIC, IF YOU ARE SO BAD LETS SEE YOU CREATE A FUNCTION LIKE THIS:

 

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510 / 1313122.5390852564 = 0.00000239245962

 

log(0.00000239245962) = -5.6211553835236

 

1 / 10e5 = 0.000001

 

1 / 0.000001 = 1000000

 

1 / 1000000 = 0.000001

 

0.000001*12 = 0.000012

0.000012^2 = 1.44e-10

299.792458/144.1994472645505= 2.07901253220476

 

144.1994472645505/299.792458= 0.48099758154873

 

log(2.07901253220476)= 0.3178571072492

 

1/0.3178571072492 = 3.14606776816854= PI RATIO!

 

SURLY I AM NOT AS DUMB AS YOU THINK I AM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That right there was too obvious and gave away the troll. You did get a few bites, though, so grats on that.

 

And please don't bother denying it at this point. When you troll as a dummy on a science forum, you have to avoid looking too dumb.

Edited September 20, 2011 by The Light Barrier

[uncool]

WELL BARIC, IF YOU ARE SO BAD LETS SEE YOU CREATE A FUNCTION LIKE THIS:

 

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510 / 1313122.5390852564

Where did this number come from? Why is it important?

= 0.00000239245962

 

log(0.00000239245962) = -5.6211553835236

This number never appears again. why do we care about it?

1 / 10e5 = 0.000001

 

1 / 0.000001 = 1000000

 

1 / 1000000 = 0.000001

 

0.000001*12 = 0.000012

0.000012^2 = 1.44e-10

This number never appears again except in the form of 144 itself. Why do the powers of 10 matter? Why not just say 12^2 = 144?

299.792458/144.1994472645505

Where does this number come from? Why not use 144 itself?

= 2.07901253220476

 

144.1994472645505/299.792458= 0.48099758154873

Where does this number get used again?

log(2.07901253220476)= 0.3178571072492

 

1/0.3178571072492 = 3.14606776816854= PI RATIO!

 

SURLY I AM NOT AS DUMB AS YOU THINK I AM

Do you really want to invite comment on that?

=Uncool-

[Phi for All]

That right there was too obvious and gave away the troll. You did get a few bites, though, so grats on that.

 

And please don't bother denying it at this point. When you troll as a dummy on a science forum, you have to avoid looking too dumb.

!

Moderator Note

It is entirely possible to make comments and discuss this thread without personal attacks. Please follow the rules you agreed to when you joined.

[csmyth3025]

I was wondering if the speed of light could be = to pi ratio in this odd find. I am really looking to get other opinions as I think I nearly stumbled on this. Not to sure if this is what I think, but I am open to opinions, thanks!

 

299.792458/144.1994472645505= 2.07901253220476

 

144.1994472645505/299.792458= 0.48099758154873

 

log(2.07901253220476)= 0.3178571072492

 

1/0.3178571072492 = 3.14606776816854 = PI RATIO?

I have absolutely no idea how or why you would choose such a contorted train of "logic" to arrive at a value of pi for the speed of light. If you think that pi has some special signifcance in the working of the cosmos, why don't you just assign that value to the speed of light and be done with it?

 

You would, of course, have to change our SI definition of the meter in order to accomodate your new definition. Instead of the meter being defined as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second..." we could say that the meter is defined as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/314 159 265 of a second...". This would require us to change all of our textbooks, astronomical calculations, speed limit laws (and signs), etc by a factor of ~1.04792251 (the new meter would be slightly longer than the old meter).

 

This seems like a lot of trouble to go to just to make a correction to what everyone already knows is just an arbitrary number we've given to the speed of light based on our previous arbitrary definition of the meter and our current arbitrary definition of the second.

 

If you're curious about the "natural" value of such things you might want to read up on Planck units. The Wikipedia article on this can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Planck_units

 

Chris

[swansont]

Also, you tend to forget the relation between 1 meter, and this is 3*12 inches = 1 meter in relation to pi ratio

1 meter is about 39 inches, so that would be 3*13.

 

The meter was chosen to be a value that's related to pi. One of the propositions was to choose it so that a 1 meter pendulum would have a half-period of 1 second

 

[math]T= 2\pi\sqrt{\frac{L}{g}}[/math]

 

The proposal was discarded because g varies dependent on your location, so it's a bad standard, but the chosen standard is very close to that value. Consequently, [math]\sqrt{g} = \pi[/math] to better than 0.5%

 

To find pi popping up in ratios in math, and especially in the SI system, is utterly unremarkable.

[baric]

!

Moderator Note

It is entirely possible to make comments and discuss this thread without personal attacks. Please follow the rules you agreed to when you joined.

 

He's trolling. Is that not against the rules?

 

edit: Also, let me be very clear about something. I did not say he was dumb. I said he was intending to appear dumb (so as to troll this forum). That is something completely different.

Edited September 20, 2011 by baric

[swansont]

He's trolling. Is that not against the rules?

 

edit: Also, let me be very clear about something. I did not say he was dumb. I said he was intending to appear dumb (so as to troll this forum). That is something completely different.

 

!

Moderator Note

The preferred approach is to let the staff make that determination. If you think someone is breaking the rules, report the post. Trolling achieves nothing if nobody responds. Getting into an argument about whether somebody is a troll either plays into their hands (if they are a troll) or is an ad hominem (if they aren't).

[The Light Barrier]

WOW! thanks for responding with respect and courtesy, as this further impels me to open more about my find. OK, this is what bothers me and it is in this:

 

 

n = 1 of 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = ½n(n + 1).

 

 

However what = this 1/2 = 0.5 variable or number?

 

 

There has to be something that is = 0.5 only which is a fraction of time.

I have found this in relation to my c squared = pi ratio:

 

 

3.1415926535897932384626433832795 - [0.00431999784] = 3.13727265574979

 

log [10](3.13727265574979) = 0.4965522642323----> round off = 0.5

 

1 / 0.5 = 2

 

0.5 / 2 = 0.25

 

4*0.25 = 1 = k

 

 

Just to let you know, this find is notarized and copyrighted!

 

You can now see that I am not pulling numbers out of nowhere like some here have "accused me of as trolling or as appearing dumb = legal excuse for verbal abuse and offense, works very good with "spousal abuse." I have been studying this since I was a child. I have found that this is due to round off errors in bases of ten within microprocessors!

 

1 meter is about 39 inches, so that would be 3*13 but this again also holds relation to 12 as in 3*13 = 39 = 3+9 =12 or even 39 = sqrt of 6.24 +4 = 2pi

 

Like I said this is a giant jigsaw puzzle that I have been on for quite some time.

 

 

Also: 1 / 0.4965522642323 = 2.01388669840437

 

 

2.01388669840437*0.4965522642323 = 1

 

Again surly I am not just using random numbers here from those whom"accused me of as trolling or as appearing dumb = legal excuse for verbal abuse and offense"works very good with "spousal abuse."

 

LOL, I think this is going to be an interesting stay!

 

 

 

 

1 meter is about 39 inches, so that would be 3*13.

 

The meter was chosen to be a value that's related to pi. One of the propositions was to choose it so that a 1 meter pendulum would have a half-period of 1 second

 

[math]T= 2\pi\sqrt{\frac{L}{g}}[/math]

 

The proposal was discarded because g varies dependent on your location, so it's a bad standard, but the chosen standard is very close to that value. Consequently, [math]\sqrt{g} = \pi[/math] to better than 0.5%

 

To find pi popping up in ratios in math, and especially in the SI system, is utterly unremarkable.

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2011 by The Light Barrier

[uncool]

WOW! thanks for responding with respect and courtesy, as this further impels me to open more about my find. OK, this is what bothers me and it is in this:

 

 

n = 1 of 1 + 2 + 3 + . . . + n = ½n(n + 1).

 

 

However what = this 1/2 = 0.5 variable or number?

Number. That was easy.

There has to be something that is = 0.5 only which is a fraction of time.

I have found this in relation to my c squared = pi ratio:

 

 

3.1415926535897932384626433832795 - [0.00431999784]

Where did this number come from?

= 3.13727265574979

 

log [10](3.13727265574979) = 0.4965522642323----> round off = 0.5

Why not just use log(pi) = .497, which is even closer?

1 / 0.5 = 2

 

0.5 / 2 = 0.25

 

4*0.25 = 1 = k

What is k here?

Just to let you know, this find is notarized and copyrighted!

 

You can now see that I am not pulling numbers out of nowhere

Actually, it makes it look even more like you are doing so. Again, the only way to dispute that you are "pulling numbers out of nowhere" is to show where you are getting your numbers.

like some here have "accused me of as trolling or as appearing dumb = legal excuse for verbal abuse and offense, works very good with "spousal abuse." I have been studying this since I was a child. I have found that this is due to round off errors in bases of ten within microprocessors!

 

1 meter is about 39 inches, so that would be 3*13 but this again also holds relation to 12 as in 3*13 = 39 = 3+9 =12 or even 39 = sqrt of 6.24 +4 = 2pi

 

Like I said this is a giant jigsaw puzzle that I have been on for quite some time.

 

 

Also: 1 / 0.4965522642323 = 2.01388669840437

 

 

2.01388669840437*0.4965522642323 = 1

And what significance does this have? Any number multiplied by its reciprocal will be 1.

Again surly I am not just using random numbers here from those whom"accused me of as trolling or as appearing dumb = legal excuse for verbal abuse and offense"works very good with "spousal abuse."

 

LOL, I think this is going to be an interesting stay!

So what does all this "proof" have anything to do with microprocessors?

=Uncool-

[questionposter]

I think that just because something has the numbers "3, 1 and 4" in it doesn't all of a sudden mean it has anything to do with Pi. Pi is a very special and unique number. Although I wouldn't be surprised if light's speed had something to do with Pi because the properties of light mimic that of a sine wave which uses Pi radians to create cycles and phases and etc, so it's possible that the wave (or circular?) properties of light make light related to Pi.

Edited September 21, 2011 by questionposter

[The Light Barrier]

Thanks for responding! Yes I am quite familiar with the h constant which holds discrete values of energy. But this does not relate to fractrional values especially in relation to infinity:Note the h constant here uses "angular" frequency in relation to an angle of four quads. Also please note! The following progression is in relation to: a square root of 100,000,000 "this is while taking your advice."

 

n = 10^4 = a square root of 100,000,000 = the following:

 

3.14*0.3178571072492 = 0.99807131676249

299.792458 / 0.99807131676249 = 300.3717800171401

 

6.626e-33 / 6.28 = w 1.05509554140127e-33

 

This checks to see if 1.05509554140127e-33 is = to 1---->1.05509554140127e-33 * 0.99807131676249 = 1.0530605963166e-33 it is.

 

This uses the famous 2x ------>4 * 300.3717800171401 = 1201.4871200685604

Now we use a log base e scale and confirm the relation of 10^4----->log [10](1201.4871200685604) = 3.07971911953182

 

1 / 10e3 = 0.0001

 

1 / 0.0001 = 10000

 

n = 10^4

 

 

 

 

I have absolutely no idea how or why you would choose such a contorted train of "logic" to arrive at a value of pi for the speed of light. If you think that pi has some special signifcance in the working of the cosmos, why don't you just assign that value to the speed of light and be done with it?

 

You would, of course, have to change our SI definition of the meter in order to accomodate your new definition. Instead of the meter being defined as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/299 792 458 of a second..." we could say that the meter is defined as "...the length of the path travelled by light in vacuum during a time interval of 1/314 159 265 of a second...". This would require us to change all of our textbooks, astronomical calculations, speed limit laws (and signs), etc by a factor of ~1.04792251 (the new meter would be slightly longer than the old meter).

 

This seems like a lot of trouble to go to just to make a correction to what everyone already knows is just an arbitrary number we've given to the speed of light based on our previous arbitrary definition of the meter and our current arbitrary definition of the second.

 

If you're curious about the "natural" value of such things you might want to read up on Planck units. The Wikipedia article on this can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Planck_units

 

Chris

 

Thanks for responding, yes pi and the speed of light have a close relation to sine waves especially in quantized energy such as the reduced h constant of 6.626^-33/ 2pi. In this I have found that when pi ratio is used what we are really doing is translating empty space out into infinity from within the source as an inversion which still sustains within the speed of light in relation to time, expansion and mass or energy. There goes that secant and co-secant line!

 

However, I have also found that pi ratio is a physical constant connected to the universe abroad. The eerry thing is this. Since it is a physical constant this means that over a period in where precession changes in relation to time and earth's seasons, it would be logical to suggest that this physical constant of pi ratio also expands like the mass expansion of energy..... Although this is a theory in general it could explain the flaws of classical physics in relation to our advancements in today's nanotechnology.....But, I also think that our traditional number of pi ratio needs upgrading!

I think that just because something has the numbers "3, 1 and 4" in it doesn't all of a sudden mean it has anything to do with Pi. Pi is a very special and unique number. Although I wouldn't be surprised if light's speed had something to do with Pi because the properties of light mimic that of a sine wave which uses Pi radians to create cycles and phases and etc, so it's possible that the wave (or circular?) properties of light make light related to Pi.

 

Here is proof is right here: 16 / 0.11111111111111 = 144.00000000000145 notice again the 144 number in relation to 12?

log [10](144.00000000000145) = 2.15836249209525

1 / 2.15836249209525 = 0.46331420401456 = again 1 / 2 = 0.5 = n = a fraction.

 

4*0.0625 = 0.25

4*0.25 = 1

Scary!!!!!!!!!!!

NOTE: 16 IS A HEXADECIMAL COMPUTER BASE NUMBER...

But trust me this subject is way out of scope for this forum, unfortunetly you need to have studied this many many years...

 

Number. That was easy.

 

Where did this number come from?

 

Why not just use log(pi) = .497, which is even closer?

 

What is k here?

 

Actually, it makes it look even more like you are doing so. Again, the only way to dispute that you are "pulling numbers out of nowhere" is to show where you are getting your numbers.

 

And what significance does this have? Any number multiplied by its reciprocal will be 1.

 

So what does all this "proof" have anything to do with microprocessors?

=Uncool-

 

 

 

 

Here is proof is right here: 16 / 0.11111111111111 = 144.00000000000145 notice again the 144 number in relation to 12?

log [10](144.00000000000145) = 2.15836249209525

1 / 2.15836249209525 = 0.46331420401456 = again 1 / 2 = 0.5 = n = a fraction.

 

4*0.0625 = 0.25

4*0.25 = 1

Violla back to 1 again.

NOTE: 16 IS A HEXADECIMAL COMPUTER BASE NUMBER...

But trust me this subject is way out of scope for this forum, unfortunetly you need to have studied this many many years...

 

Number. That was easy.

 

Where did this number come from?

 

Why not just use log(pi) = .497, which is even closer?

 

What is k here?

 

Actually, it makes it look even more like you are doing so. Again, the only way to dispute that you are "pulling numbers out of nowhere" is to show where you are getting your numbers.

 

And what significance does this have? Any number multiplied by its reciprocal will be 1.

 

So what does all this "proof" have anything to do with microprocessors?

=Uncool-

 

 

 

Edited September 21, 2011 by The Light Barrier

[uncool]

Might want to try adjusting your quotes.

[SamSneed]

I was wondering if the speed of light could be = to pi ratio in this odd find. I am really looking to get other opinions as I think I nearly stumbled on this. Not to sure if this is what I think, but I am open to opinions, thanks!

 

299.792458/144.1994472645505= 2.07901253220476

 

144.1994472645505/299.792458= 0.48099758154873

 

log(2.07901253220476)= 0.3178571072492

 

1/0.3178571072492 = 3.14606776816854 = PI RATIO?

 

First of all let me say I am by no means as smart as the people posting on here. I just have a few questions though.

 

1. Your PI RATIO really isn't a PI ratio is it? Pi is 3.14159265358979...infinity. You're number is 3.14606776816854...finite. So in theory, your Pi is 3.15 not 3.14 right? Are those two numbers both apples? Or are they apples and oranges? I'm just trying to understand how your Pi ratio is even considered Pi "anything" to begin with. To me its just two separate numbers.

 

2. I'm still not sure how you came up with 144.1994472645505. You said it was 12 squared but 12 squared is 144. Not 144.1994472645505. The number you used to come up with that had to be 12.00830743 squared. So could you explain how you came up with that number?

 

3. It appears, on the surface, that your Pi ratio only works on a planet that has a 12 hour day squared. Does it work on Saturn? Pi is Pi right? A circle on Earth is a circle on Saturn right. However, Saturn has a 10 hour day. Would your calculations work on a planet that has a 10 hour day squared? Seems odd to have calculations that only work on this planet.