Can you prove the identities for sqrt(2) and pi from the xkcd comic?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter flatmaster
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the identities presented in an xkcd comic that express certain roots, specifically sqrt(2), in terms of pi. Participants explore the validity of these identities, the implications of their correctness, and methods for proving or disproving them.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question whether the identity sqrt(2) = 3/5 - pi/(7-pi) implies that pi is an algebraic number.
  • There is a claim that only one of the identities presented is true, with participants expressing interest in determining which one it is and how it can be proven.
  • One participant suggests that the identity can be approached using a geometric series, while another mentions the use of induction and the sum-of-cosines formula as alternative methods.
  • Another participant argues that squaring both sides of the identity leads to a false equation, indicating that the identity does not hold.
  • There is a mention that the identity's validity would imply that pi is rational, which is known to be false.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of the identities, with some asserting that only one is true while others challenge the implications of the identities on the nature of pi. The discussion remains unresolved as to which identity, if any, is correct.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the identities may depend on specific mathematical operations and interpretations, and there are unresolved steps in proving or disproving the identities presented.

flatmaster
Messages
497
Reaction score
2
Great xkcd today

http://xkcd.com/

At the bottom, he claims some identities expressing some roots in terms of pi.

Is he right? What's the easiest way to prove these identities?

Sqrt(2) = 3/5 - pi/(7-pi)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org


wouldn't that identity imply that pi is an algebraic number?
 


flatmaster said:
At the bottom, he claims some identities expressing some roots in terms of pi.
Pro-tip: the following two phrases are not synonymous:
  • not all of these are wrong
  • all of these are right
 


Pro-tip: Only one of those "identities" is true. Bonus points if you figure out which it is.

I'm still trying to figure out HOW said identity is true. It's really kind of cool.
 


Char. Limit said:
Pro-tip: Only one of those "identities" is true. Bonus points if you figure out which it is.

I'm still trying to figure out HOW said identity is true. It's really kind of cool.
It's a geometric series, if you can figure out what the complex part of the numbers are supposed to be.
 


Hurkyl said:
It's a geometric series, if you can figure out what the complex part of the numbers are supposed to be.

Huh? I was talking about the cosine one.
 


Char. Limit said:
Huh? I was talking about the cosine one.
So was I. :biggrin: IIRC you can also work it out with induction and the sum-of-cosines formula, but the trick to turn it into a geometric series is faster. Of course, it's a bit annoying extracting the answer after you use the trick. There's another trick you can do that I think works out, but I haven't bothered fleshing it out.
cos x = Re{ exp(i x) }
 


flatmaster said:
Great xkcd today

http://xkcd.com/

At the bottom, he claims some identities expressing some roots in terms of pi.

Is he right? What's the easiest way to prove these identities?

Sqrt(2) = 3/5 - pi/(7-pi)

Squaring both sides results in the following equation which is false:

this is not even close
364 π+ 14 π^2 = 2009
 


coolul007 said:
Squaring both sides results in the following equation which is false:

this is not even close
364 π+ 14 π^2 = 2009



Yes, and mathwonk first noted it without the operations: it'd imply [itex]\pi[/itex] is rational, which is false, of course.

DonAntonio
 
  • #10


So is there a simple identity for [itex]\sum_{n}n^{-n}[/itex]?
 
  • #11


could I suggest linking to http://xkcd.com/1047/ instead, so that people on friday and so on don't become very confused reading this thread ;)
 
  • #12


SHISHKABOB said:
could I suggest linking to http://xkcd.com/1047/ instead, so that people on friday and so on don't become very confused reading this thread ;)

Done.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
11K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K