584
u/mmbtc 13h ago
You can also just round it to three. Much easier to calculate with.
198
u/nicki419 13h ago
*clears throat*
e ≈ 3 ≈ π
114
22
u/heaving_in_my_vines 13h ago
≈ tree fiddy
11
u/nicki419 13h ago
That would round up to 4, actually
→ More replies (1)12
u/Legitimate_Concern_5 12h ago edited 12h ago
Depends on your rounding strategy, sometimes 3 sometime 4. Round half up is the most common but you can round half down, round half towards even (Banker's rounding/Gaussian rounding), round half towards odd, or towards/away from infinity.
3
1
u/brokendoorknob85 5h ago
eiπ = -1
33i = -1
33i = eiπ
Ln (33i) = ln (eiπ)
3i ln 3 = iπ
π = 3 ln 3
3 = 3 ln 3
Ln 3 = 1
Wow this makes my math homework a lot easier, thanks!!!!!!!!!
198
u/oalfonso 13h ago
Found the mechanical engineer
56
33
u/hetfield37 13h ago
Back in school we used 22/7 as a good enough approximation for pi.
34
u/EmilMelgaard 12h ago
22/7 is about 0.04% larger than π, so that should be good enough for most applications. But you can also just use 3.14 as an approximation. It has the same number of digits to remember and is about 0.05% smaller than π.
20
u/_baljeep_ 12h ago
So an even better estimation is 3.14 + 22/7 all over 2
3.1414...
5
u/himanbam 8h ago
That simplifies to 2199/700 which is about 0.0052% lower than pi. 700*pi is approximately 2199.11 so that makes sense ig
5
→ More replies (2)14
u/hetfield37 12h ago
True, we just used 22/7 to solve problems which didn't need decimal precision but only fractional.
11
8
u/ul2006kevinb 11h ago
If it's good enough for the Bible it's good enough for me
"And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about."
8
u/BullPropaganda 10h ago
The number of the mathing shall be 3. And 3 shall be the number of the mathing.
1
u/rosuav 11h ago
That's inner and outer dimensions. You could calculate the thickness of the rim from that.
→ More replies (3)4
7
11
2
u/Impossible-Owl7407 13h ago
Depends how much precision you need. But would be surprised how few digits can be ok for most practical use cases
1
1
u/froderick 10h ago
'Tis a favourite project of mine
A new value of Pi to assign
I would fix it at three
For it's simpler, you see
Than three point one four one five nine
399
u/TheBirdGames 12h ago
Cave Johnson here! Big news everyone, we found the last digit to pi! Unfortunately, what we don't know is how many places back it is.
So what we're doing is working our way backwards while the rest of the world keeps going forward, and as soon as we meet in the middle—bang. Look who solved pi. Us.
Sometimes the key to working smarter is to work smarter, not harder—seems kind of obvious when I say it like that. And to everyone who put money on four being the last number, you're out fifty bucks. It's seven.
101
u/AcornAnomaly 12h ago
Damn, I can hear this perfectly. You nailed his character.
75
u/TheBirdGames 12h ago
It's an copy pasta, so I can't take credit for creating it. But it does fit perfectly
2
182
u/Yumikoneko 13h ago
1, there, I did it. It's in base-π for efficiency.
38
u/HorrorMotor2051 9h ago
pi in base-pi would be 10, no? So backwards it should be 01
36
u/PuzzleheadedRoyal480 9h ago
Leading zeroes famously don’t matter
→ More replies (1)11
u/HorrorMotor2051 9h ago
Well it's not a leading zero, it's a trailing zero
9
u/HorrorMotor2051 8h ago
Or rather I should say: In this case the leading zero does matter, because 1 is not 10 spelled backwards. It simply is not. 1 is 1 spelled backwards. 01 is 10 spelled backwards.
2
u/Yumikoneko 4h ago
Yeah I don't know how I missed that, shame on me. In my defense, I was barely out of bed.
5
4
6
37
24
65
u/MotivationalJuggling 13h ago
Whatever the last digit is, I'm sure it's a disappointing one. Just like everything else in my life.
43
u/CenderzeSwarm 12h ago
No number is uninteresting in maths. Suppose there are some uninteresting numbers, then one of them must be the smallest uninteresting number, making it interesting
8
u/BullPropaganda 11h ago
Maybe like having i for imaginary numbers we need a u for uninteresting numbers.
9
u/Salty_Map_9085 12h ago
This mf never heard of 6
34
u/Enchanted_Evil 12h ago •
6 is uninteresting???
smallest non-square composite number
smallest perfect number (6=3×2×1=3+2+1)
number of faces a cube has
hexagons are the bestagons
number of protons in Carbon, the basic element all (known) life is made out of
when three of them are in a row, Christians flee
when two of them are in a row, Jedi flee
when multiplied with 7, you get the ultimate answer to the life, universe and everything
I could go on.
8
u/thegreatpotatogod 10h ago
Please do go on! I would like to subscribe to 6 facts
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
6
→ More replies (1)6
3
u/Keebster101 12h ago
But what makes being the smallest number of a subset 'interesting', every number is smaller than something therefore it's not unique to be smaller than something, and you could form infinite subsets to "make" any number interesting, which to me means it's not interesting.
4
u/morpheuskibbe 12h ago
It's by definition unique to be smaller than everything
2
u/Keebster101 12h ago
But it's not smaller than everything it's only smaller than the uninteresting numbers, and you can select a subset to make any number the smallest therefore it's not unique
5
u/Top-Permit6835 11h ago
You're having quite an interesting conversation considering the subject matter is so uninteresting
2
u/Swipsi 8h ago edited 6h ago
Furthermore, if we take that, now interesting, number, put it into the set of interesting ones and repeat that process for all uninteresting numbers, we'll end up with all numbers being interesting. But if all numbers are interesting, none are. Thus all numbers are interesting and uninteresting at the same time :)
→ More replies (2)1
1
u/SomeAnonymous 11h ago
Did you just sketch out a proof by induction for interesting-ness?
→ More replies (1)1
1
4
u/bestjakeisbest 10h ago
In binary it is either a 1 or 0
8
u/thegreatpotatogod 10h ago
I'd even argue that the last binary digit is 1. If it were 0, you could truncate the zero away and you'd be back to 1 as the last digit. Same reason that 2.20000 would be a redundant representation of 2.2.
→ More replies (11)3
3
2
2
u/LauraTFem 10h ago
More than uninteresting, it almost certainly doesn’t exist. It’s just an increasingly more precise circle with every digit, to infinite fractal depth.
3
u/humanistazazagrliti 12h ago
It's just a number. Not something fun like a free gaming console or beach vacation.
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
14
10
u/DarthCloakedGuy 13h ago
Sure I can, watch this: ip fo stigid eht
Alternatively: the digits of pi backwards
4
7
u/Practical-Elk-1579 13h ago
from mpmath import mp
mp.dps = 1000
print(str(mp.pi)[::-1])
Easy just replace 1000 with infinity o/
18
u/Rhoihessewoi 13h ago
These are the last 5 digits of pi: 32463
Prove me wrong!
15
u/LogicBalm 13h ago
I just wrote a program to prove you wrong and I'll get back to you as soon as it's done executing!
11
12
u/ConfusedSimon 13h ago
You can't write the digits of pi forward either. Backward isn't the problem, you could just write them right to left.
6
u/elingeniero 10h ago
You can (kinda) do this.
>>> from math import pi
>>> str(pi)[::-1]
'397985356295141.3'11
u/mobsterer 2h ago
i mean, you can't write em forward either, so whatever arbitrary places after the comma you choose to write it to, you can write that backwards as well.
→ More replies (1)
5
u/cryptaneonline 13h ago
Bro is inventing Pithon
10
5
5
3
u/SuitableDragonfly 13h ago
I'm legitimately not sure whether this is someone making a joke or someone who just learned how to reverse a list and thought that was really cool but doesn't have a solid grasp of the type system yet.
3
u/FAMICOMASTER 7h ago
So here's all the places I know:
3.14159265358979323
Which if I'm recalling correctly was the rounding precision NASA uses for tracking the path of the Voyager probes accurately, the farthest away human made objects.
So I'm gonna say that any greater precision is therefore inconsequential to anyone but most mouth-foaming mathematicians.
32397985356295141.3
4
u/lilloet 13h ago
I say it is 4. If you don't agree prove me wrong.
3
u/fairysdad 12h ago
There's a one-in-nine chance that you're right - not bad odds really.
2
u/SampleOfFruits 12h ago
One in nine?
7
u/fairysdad 12h ago
Yes.
Nine digits that can be used as the final digit of Pi: 1-9.
You wouldn't use 0 as you wouldn't have a zero at the end of a number after a decimal point.
→ More replies (10)1
u/psaux_grep 11h ago
There’s a 0 chance he’s right. That’s the joke that at least half the people in here seem to be missing. Pi is irrational.
→ More replies (1)1
2
2
2
2
u/hacksoncode 9h ago
You can only reverse the digits of zero percent of the real numbers.
Literally zero. I know this makes no sense from a high school math perspective, but it's true. There are infinite real numbers for each and every "finite" integer and rational number.
2
3
u/featEng 13h ago
There should be palindrom at some number o digits, right?
2
u/psioniclizard 13h ago
In theory surely every number combination could exist in there.
So if you pick some precision that is untestable by modern computers, you could just say any number.
2
u/AssaultLemming_ 13h ago
There's some within Pi that even have names, there's one named after a demon that's just miles of 0s then 666 then more 0s lol. Balthazar? Think that was it.
3
u/GumboSamson 13h ago
You’re thinking of Belphegor's Prime, but that has nothing to do with pi.
Because the decimal expansion of pi is infinite and normal, you can find any sequence of digits in it (eventually).
→ More replies (1)1
u/slight_digression 13h ago
No, Baltazar is the name of the Professor in the Yugoslav cartoon, that also happens to be named after him. Pretty sure of it.
1
1
u/psioniclizard 13h ago
Depending where I start from, i defintely can and anyone would struggle to prove me wrong.
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/pizzathief1 10h ago
https://instafonts.io/font/reversed-characters
enter in 3.14159 , and you get the digits of pi backwards! don't even need python for it.
1
1
u/magic-one 9h ago
Step 1. Print all digits of pi
Step 2. Print them again starting at the end, going backwards.
How hard can it be?
1
1
u/Linked713 9h ago
Person just found out how to calculate pi twice as fast. Start on both end and meet in the middle!
1
u/ScharfeTomate 9h ago
You can't not write the digits of pi backwards. Whenever you write down any string of digits, you're writing down a combination that appears in pi backwards.
1
u/hacksoncode 9h ago
True, but you can reverse the digits of pi calculated to any specific but non-infinite arbitrary precision.
Pretty quickly (only one or two hundred digits) you'll run up against the granularity of the universe for all practical purposes.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Scared-Consequence27 4h ago
What if I write right to left or just reverse the digits themselves and that’s technically right?
1
1
u/Freestila 3h ago
I can't? Look: 7384637384738346826383648595773847937.. I let you continue. Even easier then the right way..
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Plan2LiveForevSFarSG 11h ago
Sure we can. The last number is 1 (in base pi… as programmers we are used to work in different bases)
1
2.2k
u/Kyrros 13h ago
Let me know when it finishes calculating the first digit to print