In article <BN5vm.email@example.com> "|-|erc" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes: > > "Dik T. Winter" <Dik.Winter@cwi.nl> wrote > > However, the 'never coming to an end' has nothing to do with this. In a > > decimal expansion a the sequence of decimals does not terminate when the > > number is *not* a rational number with a denominator that has only factors > > 2 and/or 5. Pi is not such a number and so you can draw your conclusions. > > you disagree with everyone else who says the fact it's trancendental or > the fact it's irrational mean it's expansion does not terminate.
In what way do I disagree? I say that it terminates *only* if some condition holds. Obviously the condition does not hold for transcendental numbers, and so it does not terminate in that case.
> The well known context of random regarding pi's digits is pseudorandom, so the context is quite clear > although mathematicians and skeptics have trouble seeing the context.
In that case you should say that the *sequence of digits* is pseudorandom. Note however that it the sequence of digits of a number actually is pseudorandom it most likely is a rational number. -- dik t. winter, cwi, science park 123, 1098 xg amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131 home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/