> I think that 2 * pi comes up quite a bit more in modern maths than pi, but > that wasn't necessarily true at the time the pi notation originated. From > the standpoint of the contemporary mathematician, it would make more sense > to call pi = 6.28... > > Is this connected with transcendence? Not really, e is also > transcendental. It's very important in mathematics to define notation and > concepts to be as simple and transparent as possible. Defining pi as the > number that we now call 2 * pi would be an improvement. But the > improvement is not significant enough to overcome inertia -- there is > value in sticking to historical precedents, too. > > Having to restate all pi-based formulate would be irritating too.
It can't be restated in books that are already printed. And probably pi appears in (the source code of) a lot of computer programs used e.g. to control devices. I think the world is in enough trouble already without having to deal with the mess most probably following such a redefinition of pi.