My PI questions - I hope they are valid?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter kris kaczmarczyk
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pi
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical properties and implications of the number Pi (π), particularly in relation to its digits, potential patterns, and applications in describing the universe. Participants explore theoretical questions about the nature of Pi, its relationship to human creations, and the precision required for various calculations involving the universe's dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether Pi contains encoded texts, such as Shakespeare's Hamlet, suggesting that the probability of such encodings is 1, though this does not guarantee their existence.
  • Another participant argues that while it is possible for Pi to contain any sequence, including literary works, it is also possible that such patterns may never occur, emphasizing the randomness of Pi's digits.
  • Discussion includes the idea that the digit 8 in π² may be influenced by earlier digits, but another participant challenges this notion, suggesting that the influence of distant digits diminishes as the decimal position increases.
  • Participants explore the implications of the universe's size and the precision of Pi needed to describe it, with one suggesting that to measure the observable universe accurately, a specific number of digits of Pi would be required.
  • One participant mentions the misconception regarding the Planck distance and its relevance to measuring the universe, indicating that the question of how many digits of Pi are needed for precision is complex and context-dependent.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of pathological counter-examples in mathematics, questioning the general rule that each digit of a product depends only on the digits of the factors up to a certain point.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on the nature of Pi and its digits, with no clear consensus on the existence of patterns or the implications of its digits in relation to human creations or the universe's measurements. The discussion remains unresolved on several points, particularly regarding the influence of distant digits and the precision required for calculations.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference the concept of normal numbers and the implications for the existence of patterns within Pi. There are also discussions about the assumptions underlying the calculations and the definitions of terms like "Planck distance." The complexity of measuring the universe with high precision is acknowledged, but specific limitations are not fully resolved.

kris kaczmarczyk
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
1) If Pi has my birthday digit sequence starting at digit at ~ 200k position (I did check, strange experience), can It also contain digital encoded (Ascii) Shakespeare's Hamlet? or Any other human creation ever done now and in the future?

2) Pi square ~ 9.86960440109 , we can calculate exactly the value of these digits "9.8.."
but can I say (?) for example that digit 8 is influenced by the "last digits of Pi", so can I say that looking at 8 I see the consequence of some digits in infinite distance...

3) if our universe is the approximate sphere of 5 billion light years and the unit is Plank distance, can we calculate how many digits of precision of Pi do we need to precisely describe the sphere of the known Universe, then what would be the meaning of digits beyond that number?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
The answer to question 1 is Yes, and further the probability that it contains such an encoding is 1 (which does not necessarily mean it does contain such an encoding).

You might like the short story 'The Library of Babel' by Jorge Luis Borges, which contains an infinite number of books full of apparently random text. The monks that tend the library know that somewhere in the library must be a book or series of books that gives the answer to life, the universe and everything, in a way that is more helpful than Deep Thought's response of '42'. They devote their lives to trying to find it. But of course they never do.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: BWV
These are questions that can’t really be answered with other than guesses.

(1) it’s possible but it’s also possible that it will never occur nor any of the other works of literature in whatever language and coding scheme. Our best guess is that PI has no pattern in its expansion but who knows what we’ll see is selected strings of digits.

It’s akin to the Bible Code book that was popular some time ago where future predictions were discovered in the text of the Bible if you applied some arbitrary pattern of choosing every nth word or nth character or page ...

Of course, coincidences happened but when you prime yourself to find a pattern you have a good chance of finding it.

Carl Sagan in his Contact ended it with someone finding the image of a circle in the digits of pi as an indication that it was somehow constructed to be that way.

(2) i would say no but perhaps @fresh_42 would have a more definitive answer. To affect 8 you would have to generate a sum of 0.04 to push the 0.06 to overflow and that can’t happen as the decimal position gets smaller and smaller. I don’t like my answer here and hope that fresh can explain it better perhaps with a polynomial expansion of the product of ##\pi^2## again another guess.

(3) PI is a purely mathematical number and as such is of interest to a mathematician with all its digits. In contrast an engineer would use a numerical approximation that is relevant to his or her line of work. Same goes for the scientist.
 
To expand on @jedishrfu answer to (2):

We can write pi as ##3.141 + 0.001 \theta## where ##0<\theta<1##.
Hence
$$\pi^2 = (3.141 + 0.001 \theta)^2 = 3.141^2 + 0.003141\theta + 0.000001\theta^2
= 9.865881 + \theta(0.003141 + 0.000001\theta)$$

The second term of that must lie in the range (0, 0.003142), since ##0<\theta<1##.

Hence we have:

$$9.865881= 9.865881+ 0< \pi^2 < 9.865881+0.003142 = 9.869023$$

So the first two digits after the decimal must be '86'.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
kris kaczmarczyk said:
1) If Pi has my birthday digit sequence starting at digit at ~ 200k position (I did check, strange experience), can It also contain digital encoded (Ascii) Shakespeare's Hamlet? or Any other human creation ever done now and in the future?

This is an open question in number theory. It depends on whether ##\pi## is a "normal" number or not. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number
kris kaczmarczyk said:
2) Pi square ~ 9.86960440109 , we can calculate exactly the value of these digits "9.8.."
but can I say (?) for example that digit 8 is influenced by the "last digits of Pi", so can I say that looking at 8 I see the consequence of some digits in infinite distance...

When you multiply two decimal fractions, each digit of the answer depends only on the digits up to a certain point. You can see this by looking at the usual technique for long multiplication. Or, by looking at a decimal expansion as, for example:

##\pi = 3 + (1 \times 10^{-1}) + (4 \times 10^{-2}) + (1 \times 10^{-3}) \dots##

From this you can see that the first digit of ##\pi^2## after the decimal point depends only on the multiplication of:

##3.14 \times 3.14 = 9.8596##

If we take the more precise calculation:

##3.141 \times 3.141 = 9.865881##

The second calculation differs from the first only from the second decimal term onwards. The ##9.8## is common. And, in fact, we see now that ##\pi^2 = 9.86 \dots## etc. If we add more decimal places, we do not change the ##9.86##.
kris kaczmarczyk said:
3) if our universe is the approximate sphere of 5 billion light years and the unit is Plank distance, can we calculate how many digits of precision of Pi do we need to precisely describe the sphere of the known Universe, then what would be the meaning of digits beyond that number?

This question makes no sense. The Planck distance is not a quantisation of space. That's a common misconception. See, for example:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/hand-wavy-discussion-planck-length/
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kris kaczmarczyk, QuantumQuest and fresh_42
Thank you-
3) @fresh_42 looking at the beautiful book the Zoomable Universe, we have 10^27 Universe and 10^-18 field scale , on next page is Pi ;) - my question was how can we figure out to measure 10^27 with resolution 10^-18 for example (not a Planck but BIGGER) , how many digits of Pi we would need for this resolution;

3b) friend of mine ask me once , i never solved it: from the point in the middle of NYC what is the equal distance I have to walk NORTH, WEST, SOUTH and EAST so I end up 1 meter WEST of the point I have started?
 
PeroK said:
When you multiply two decimal fractions, each digit of the answer depends only on the digits up to a certain point.
Although this is normally true, there are pathological counter-examples.

Consider an easy one. Take the decimal expansion of ##\sqrt{2}## and square it. The result is 2 (of course).

Now find a non-zero digit anywhere in that decimal expansion. Decrement it and the square of the resulting number will be 1.something.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kris kaczmarczyk
jbriggs444 said:
Although this is normally true, there are pathological counter-examples.

Consider an easy one. Take the decimal expansion of ##\sqrt{2}## and square it. The result is 2 (of course).

Or, the result is ##1.999 \dots##
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: kris kaczmarczyk, nuuskur and jbriggs444
kris kaczmarczyk said:
3) @fresh_42 looking at the beautiful book the Zoomable Universe, we have 10^27 Universe and 10^-18 field scale , on next page is Pi ;) - my question was how can we figure out to measure 10^27 with resolution 10^-18 for example (not a Planck but BIGGER) , how many digits of Pi we would need for this resolution;
It's unclear exactly what you're asking, but (for example) the radius of the observable universe is something on the order of 1061 Planck lengths. If you knew this number to the nearest Planck length and wanted to figure out what (e.g.,) the circumference of the observable universe was to the same accuracy, you would need to know pi to roughly 61 digits, since pi enters into the circumference equation linearly.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: jedishrfu
  • #10
TeethWhitener said:
It's unclear exactly what you're asking, but (for example) the radius of the observable universe is something on the order of 1061 Planck lengths. If you knew this number to the nearest Planck length and wanted to figure out what (e.g.,) the circumference of the observable universe was to the same accuracy, you would need to know pi to roughly 61 digits, since pi enters into the circumference equation linearly.
Thank you very much, this is exactly what I was asking for. Believing or not this is surprising answer (expected much more digits!) . Now when I think about it, the difficulty lies in measuring Universe with such a precision.
 
  • #11
PeroK said:
This is an open question in number theory. It depends on whether ##\pi## is a "normal" number or not. See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_numberWhen you multiply two decimal fractions, each digit of the answer depends only on the digits up to a certain point. You can see this by looking at the usual technique for long multiplication. Or, by looking at a decimal expansion as, for example:

##\pi = 3 + (1 \times 10^{-1}) + (4 \times 10^{-2}) + (1 \times 10^{-3}) \dots##

From this you can see that the first digit of ##\pi^2## after the decimal point depends only on the multiplication of:

##3.14 \times 3.14 = 9.8596##

If we take the more precise calculation:

##3.141 \times 3.141 = 9.865881##

The second calculation differs from the first only from the second decimal term onwards. The ##9.8## is common. And, in fact, we see now that ##\pi^2 = 9.86 \dots## etc. If we add more decimal places, we do not change the ##9.86##.

This question makes no sense. The Planck distance is not a quantisation of space. That's a common misconception. See, for example:

https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/hand-wavy-discussion-planck-length/
Thank you very much for the answers.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
  • Sticky
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
8K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K