What is the Exact Number to Pi?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anything
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pi
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the nature of pi, particularly inquiries about its exact representation and the number of digits it contains. Participants express curiosity about the irrationality of pi and its implications in various mathematical contexts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants question the need for a large number of digits of pi and discuss its irrational nature. Some share methods for approximating pi and explore the implications of its transcendental status. Others inquire about plotting pi on a number line and the feasibility of constructing it geometrically.

Discussion Status

The discussion includes various perspectives on the significance of pi's digits and its mathematical properties. Some participants provide insights into algorithms for calculating pi, while others express confusion about its applications. There is no explicit consensus, but several productive lines of inquiry are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention constraints related to homework rules and the nature of pi as an irrational and transcendental number, which affects how it can be represented or constructed.

Anything
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Pi

does anyone know the exact number to pi (yes the one over 1000 characters long:P) i need it a.s.a.p
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That is only an approximation. You can find certain amounts of digits on Google, but they aren't exact.
 
Anything said:
does anyone know the exact number to pi (yes the one over 1000 characters long:P) i need it a.s.a.p
You can't write it fully in decimal form as it is irrational.
 
Anything said:
does anyone know the exact number to pi (yes the one over 1000 characters long:P) i need it a.s.a.p
You can calculate pi's decimal expansion using the algorithms here.
 
Why do you need pi to that accuracy, and why have people got computers working out pi to that number of decimal places? What is the use, I don't get it...:confused:
 
pi approximations

:bugeye: There is a mathematician named Borwien who has come up with some neat algorithms. The best one in terms of speed of convergence vs. complexity
converge quartically, i.e. the number of correct digit roughly quadruples every iteration, furthermore the algorithms only involve square roots and fourth roots, nothing as complicated as Ramujan's stuff. Using this algorithm a mere 15 iterations gives something like a billion digits. His derivation of it is an interesting mix of elliptic intergrals and the arithmetic-geometric mean of a number. What takes computers so long these days is just the mechanics of doing arithmatic on numbers with a billion digits. Look up Borwein if you are interested,
 
finchie_88 said:
Why do you need pi to that accuracy, and why have people got computers working out pi to that number of decimal places? What is the use, I don't get it...:confused:

Conjecture: pi is normal. Normal roughly means that the digits of pi behave randomly in some sense. We can't prove this, but knowing pi to many places has provided strong supporting evidence for it to be true.

Further, having a known (transcendetal) constant is useful for benchmarking alogrithms (ie how fast they converge)
 
I remember trying to figure out a formula for calculating pi a few months ago and came up with: 2x(sin(90/x)) where a very big value of x gets a close approximation for pi.
My calculator could only evaluate it to 10 digits though...the other millions of digits where given in standard form
 
  • #10
GregA said:
I remember trying to figure out a formula for calculating pi a few months ago and came up with: 2x(sin(90/x)) where a very big value of x gets a close approximation for pi.
My calculator could only evaluate it to 10 digits though...the other millions of digits where given in standard form
Taylor expand sin(90°/x) = sin([itex]\frac{\pi}{2x}[/itex]) around x=0, and see what you get. :)
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Can anybody tell me how to plot pi on anumber line?
 
  • #12
Manchot said:
Taylor expand sin(90°/x) = sin([itex]\frac{\pi}{2x}[/itex]) around x=0, and see what you get. :)

Gonna be a while before I can do that :redface:
 
  • #13
Aditya89 said:
Can anybody tell me how to plot pi on anumber line?

Sure. Just place a dot at about 3.14 and then label it [tex]\pi[/tex].
 
  • #14
Aditya89 said:
Can anybody tell me how to plot pi on anumber line?
What do you mean by "plot pi"?

If you mean just mark a point on a line, pi is approximately 3.14. Marking that point should be sufficient. If you mean "construct a line segment, using compass and straight edge, having length pi, given a line segment of length 1", it is impossible. pi is transcendental and so not constructible.
 
  • #16
GregA said:
Gonna be a while before I can do that :redface:
Ok, well basically, using calculus, you can show that

[tex]\sin{x} = x - \frac{x^3}{3!} + \frac{x^5}{5!} - \frac{x^7}{7!} + ...[/tex]

where x is in radians. (You can easily verify this for yourself on a graphing calculator, if you have one.) This infinite series converges for all x, but it is centered around zero, so it converges for low numbers "before" it converges for high ones. In fact, for numbers that are infinitely close to zero, you can just drop the higher order terms and say that [itex]\sin(x) = x[/itex]. You were taking x to be infinitely high, so [itex]\frac{\pi}{2x}[/itex] would be very low, and you can say that [itex]2x\sin(\frac{\pi}{2x}) = 2x(\frac{\pi}{2x}) = 2(\frac{\pi}{2}) = \pi[/itex]. Nice, huh?

(Incidentally, I arrived at a formula very similar to yours when I was a sophomore in high school, and knew geometry but not calculus. Would I be correct in guessing that you arrived at it by calculating the circumference of a regular polygon with an infinite number of sides?)
 
  • #17
Anything said:
does anyone know the exact number to pi (yes the one over 1000 characters long:P) i need it a.s.a.p

There is no exact number. It is Irrational. It's sum{Pi^2/2}=1/n^2 If I'm not mistaking...and imagine how many natural numbers there are...
 
  • #18
Robokapp said:
There is no exact number. It is Irrational. It's sum{Pi^2/2}=1/n^2 If I'm not mistaking...and imagine how many natural numbers there are...
I think you're driving at zeta (2).
[tex]\zeta(2) = \Sigma_{i=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{i^2} = \frac{\pi^2}{6}[/tex]
The proof of the irrationality (or indeed transcendence) of pi does not depend on that equality, though.
 
  • #19
VietDao29 said:
I don't know what's that for... But anyway, here it is:
Pi to 1,000,000 places.

I wonder...why do you need it? are you trying to crack it? If you succeed let me know!
 
  • #20
HallsofIvy said:
What do you mean by "plot pi"?
If you mean just mark a point on a line, pi is approximately 3.14. Marking that point should be sufficient. If you mean "construct a line segment, using compass and straight edge, having length pi, given a line segment of length 1", it is impossible. pi is transcendental and so not constructible.

By that, I meant that can u plot it by any other method. And I have also got the answer now. It is constructible by some other apparatus.
 
  • #21
Manchot said:
Ok, well basically, using calculus, you can show that
[tex]\sin{x} = x - \frac{x^3}{3!} + \frac{x^5}{5!} - \frac{x^7}{7!} + ...[/tex]
where x is in radians. (You can easily verify this for yourself on a graphing calculator, if you have one.) This infinite series converges for all x, but it is centered around zero, so it converges for low numbers "before" it converges for high ones. In fact, for numbers that are infinitely close to zero, you can just drop the higher order terms and say that [itex]\sin(x) = x[/itex]. You were taking x to be infinitely high, so [itex]\frac{\pi}{2x}[/itex] would be very low, and you can say that [itex]2x\sin(\frac{\pi}{2x}) = 2x(\frac{\pi}{2x}) = 2(\frac{\pi}{2}) = \pi[/itex]. Nice, huh?
(Incidentally, I arrived at a formula very similar to yours when I was a sophomore in high school, and knew geometry but not calculus. Would I be correct in guessing that you arrived at it by calculating the circumference of a regular polygon with an infinite number of sides?)
very nice! :smile:
with regards to how I arrived at the formula, it's a similar method to yours but instead I chose right-angled triangles as opposed to n-sided polygons... on a cartesian graph (my easiest way to describe it) make a circle with it's centre the origin and work on just one quadrant. Make a chord from the point where the circle crosses the x-axis and where it crosses the y-axis. This is now an isocolese triangle...bisect this chord with a line from the origin and make two chords from where this line hits the circumfrence..you now have two isocolese triangles...you can repeat the process indefinitely but if you cut these triangles in half you have x number of right-angled triangles (x also being equal to the number of times 90 degrees has been subdivided into smaller angles) using sin (90/x) and then multiplying this by x you have the approximate ratio of half a semicircle's circumfrence to its radius and you just multiply this by two.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K