
Re: It is a very bad idea and nothing less than stupid to define 1/3 = 0.333...
Posted:
Oct 2, 2017 6:41 PM


Because pi is an incommensurable ratio, a Greek notion, it can never by a rational number. But I don't know whether they really considered pi already as such.
There is this story with pythagoras and sqrt(2) irrational. But I am also loss what concerns the "lost book by Fibonacci", I must have lost it as well:
Were ratios of incommensurable magnitudes interpreted as irrational numbers prior to Fibonacci? https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/5582/wereratiosofincommensurablemagnitudesinterpretedasirrationalnumbersprio/5585
Am Dienstag, 3. Oktober 2017 00:33:48 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com: > What do you want to fix? If pi is already there, > than a 0step process is sufficient, the process says: > > hi I am at pi > > Or if you want you can use a 1step process, one > that starts with Euler number e: > > hi I am at e > now I add pie to myself > hi I am at pi > > I guess you mean Qseries or something. Yes pi is > irrational, no element from Q. And a Qseries will > never hit pi on its way. Here is a proof: > > Proof: Assume a Qseries would hit pi on its way. > Then there would be an index n, such that sn=pi, > the partial sum up to n summands would equal pi. > > But each partial sum of a Qseries is from Q, and > pi is not from Q, so we would get a contradiction > saying pi is from Q, since it would be sn=pi. > > So by proof by contradiction the > Qseries cannot hit pi. > > > Am Montag, 2. Oktober 2017 23:32:25 UTC+2 schrieb netzweltler: > > Am Montag, 2. Oktober 2017 22:09:44 UTC+2 schrieb burs...@gmail.com: > > > Well this is probably the greatest nonsense somebody > > > ever posted on sci.math. You know, you didn't say > > > rational number line. > > > > > > So when it is the real number line, pi is of course > > > there. There is of course a point on the real number > > > line that is pi. > > > > It doesn't make sense to discuss the "number line" as long as the problem under discussion hasn't been fixed. > > > > > > > > Am Montag, 2. Oktober 2017 19:54:44 UTC+2 schrieb netzweltler: > > > > Yes. pi is already there and we can exactly locate its position on the number line, but you cannot locate a point on the number line representing pi if this point would be the result of a stepwise process  neither a finite process nor an infinite.

