Question

"Knowing it's specified precisely, it come down without precision Pi = 3.14 or 22/7, but 22/7 is greater than 3.14 with evidence that the 3.14 times 7 does not equal 22"
I got this in philosophy book, How is 22/7 equal to Pi ?

Answer 1

It isn't.

Answer 2

Yup i know, but do you consider this little paragraph true ? i mean has sense ?

Answer 3

The English is broken, and yours is a bit too. My best interpretation is that it is talking about whether \(3.14\) or \(22/7\) is a better approximation of \(\pi\).

Answer 4

Yes it's translated, if he's talking about the best approximation how does he consider 22/7 a Pi number ?

Answer 5

Convert it into decimal form. It's somewhat close.

Answer 6

best approximation is
3.14...

Answer 7

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=%7Cpi+-+22%2F7%7C+%3C+%7C+pi+-+3.14%7C+

Look at this.

Answer 8

Close =\ Exact

Answer 9

Approximations are not always exact.

Answer 10

+ 22/7 is an old approximation

Answer 11

Ok, so how does he comparing potatoes with tomatoes ?

Answer 12

he is not a mathematician, he is a philosopher okay ?
i feel there must be something he is trying to convey other than the numerical value of pi

Answer 13

مع علمي بأن هذا العددمحدد تحديدا دقيقاحسب العلاقة المجردة بين الدائرة و قطرها فانه ينزل دون الدقة

Answer 14

أي كتاب ؟

Answer 15

@ikram002p if you can translate it better

Answer 16

arabic ?

Answer 17

is it from quran ?

Answer 18

Nope @ganeshie8 :P

Answer 19

اكتب كل الجملة ^^

Answer 20

c'mon guys speak some common language :|

Answer 21

22/7 is only an approximation of pi. When new values pf pi have been reached (1,000,000 digits, billion digits, trillion digits) what do you think they used for a formula? No they do not continue carrying out the six digits of 22/7 3.142857142857142857....

Answer 22

google translate throws this out :
"I know that with this Aladdmohdd specifically Dqikahsb abstract relationship between the diameter of the circle and it comes down without precision"

Answer 23

بي أي 22/7 ولكن التقسيم الفعلي يساوي اكثر من العدد بي بدليل 3.14 في 7
لا يساوي 22

Answer 24

عنتر بس معلش اكتب كل الجملة كاملة وكمان اسم الكتاب والكاتب ازا ما عندك مانع اوك ؟

Answer 25

@ganeshie8 oh no dnt google it lol XD

Answer 26

>.<

Answer 27

Don't worry people i'm just typing the text with Arabic to @ikram002p

Answer 28

@ganeshie8 is it correct to compare \(\frac{22}{7}\) with \(\pi\), in a book any how ?

Answer 29

ohk simply the writer trying to say that he knows that pi is
bla bla bla trash book... get a reall info abt pi , its sounds like
he gonna complex somthing clear

Answer 30

pi dnt = 22/7

Answer 31

he is free to write anything he wishes in his book right ? :P

below are more accurate representations for pi :
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/PiFormulas.html

Answer 32

This the problem, he is going to complex something clear as you said, and this is the part that i don't like

Answer 33

^i agree wid that

Answer 34

@ganeshie8 the problem that he's not free, because it's a school book

Answer 35

u said its a philosophy book ?

Answer 36

Yeah the school book of philosophy :D

Answer 37

oh okay lol... again its not a math book... have some mercy on author lol :)

Answer 38

He is going to complex something clear? What are you smoking?

Answer 39

u should read some of the novels by indian authors

Answer 40

they mean - he is complicating something which is very clear/obvious

Answer 41

Complex isn't a verb.

Answer 42

:) lol, I think that mentioning \(\frac{22}{7}\) in a topic talking about \(\pi\) has no sense

Answer 43

@ganeshie8 ok the thing is i cant tell u this as an axion door is a food then try to convince u with idea
he said first
pi=22/7 as an axiom lol
and when we converge it wud be 3.14
but 3.14*7 dnt equal 22 lol which sense that make !

Answer 44

@wio are you proud of your english ?

Answer 45

No, I'm annoyed about any complaints about clarity when using English that is also unclear.

Answer 46

in highschool grade we teach kids to replace 22/7 where ever they see pi

so maybe the author is a high school dropout or somthing... but i wont say it out loud >.<

Answer 47

@wio lol ok

Answer 48

ikram in philosophy book he should talk about axioms of causality / philosophy etc... math is not his business i feel

Answer 49

huh ok thats wat im trying to say
pi=22/7 is an old approximation !
Antar plz tell me who said it lol !

Answer 50

\[\frac{ a }{ b }=c \approx d\]
Means :
\[d*b=a\]
loooooooooooooool

Answer 51

Your translation doesn't say that.

Answer 52

\[
\frac{a}{b}\approx c\land d\approx c\\
c\times b < a\implies c<\frac{a}{b}
\]In the context that \(b>0\).

Answer 53

@ikram002p I'm trying to find the writer, i feel he is going to tell me that Eqluids who write this and heal himself

Answer 54

also when u round like that, u need to provide sigfigs/precision info

saying pi ~ 22/7 is okay - when u also provide info of to what precision the approximation works

Answer 55

@wio Are you going to (complex) clear things ?

Answer 56

I'm going to clear up a misinterpretation.

Answer 57

I think that he cannot differentiates between the curved and the straight equal sign

Answer 58

What's in conclusion people ?, and thank you

Answer 59

You are making fun of some philosopher using some poorly translated excerpt from his book.

Answer 60

What's the point?

Answer 61

ok wat the writer said is this :
مع علمي بأن هذا العددمحدد تحديدا دقيقاحسب العلاقة المجردة بين الدائرة و قطرها فانه ينزل دون الدقة
بي أي 22/7 ولكن التقسيم الفعلي يساوي اكثر من العدد بي بدليل 3.14 في 7 لا يساوي 22
"with my knowlage that pi is a specific exact number from the abstracat ratio btw the circle and its diameter , its not exact cuz pi=22/7 but the reall ratio is more than pi
as a proof 3.14 dnt equal 22/7"

Answer 62

@wio He's not philosopher, especially our Teacher who is very acceptable to his saying :)

Answer 63

It's from a philosophy book.

Answer 64

@ikram002p Google Alternative :D

Answer 65

this "He's not philosopher, especially our Teacher who is very acceptable to his saying :)" i dint get for reall say it in arabic ur confusing me :o

Answer 66

then he is saying :

\(\large \frac{perimeter}{diameter} \ne \frac{22}{7}\)

Answer 67

he is saying that
3.14=22/7
but
3.14*7 dnt equal 22

Answer 68

okay... we need to do a 'close reading' and scrutinize

Answer 69

@ikram002p انه ليس فيلسوف, خصوصا استاذنا الذي هو يقبل بشدة كلامه

Answer 70

am i wrong @ikram002p ?

Answer 71

wat i cud see in his point of veiw that he dnt agree with the reall ratio of pi
depend on pi =22/7
so wat i can see
he is a philosopher from old ancient else he would be a foul lol XD

Answer 72

Exactly, you are right

Answer 73

I'm going to write the whole of the speech and send it to you

Answer 74

so to move out what we are interrupt in , just provide us with: who said , when he said it , and why
so mathematically i cant see any sense but if u wanna knw the philosophical outlook just knw these information XD

Answer 75

lol i can see nw , after the whole sub u gave me,(btw u shud give it to us from the begining) the auther trying to show how math is weak in practical field by giving the pi example that we cud not in real life or application get the exact pi value so we use approximation value thats oly
*******************************************************
he put this title
how much far we cud say that math has limits and weakness
then he started to show the limits and weakness of it in practical fields
he started first by asking wat the value we cud get from mathmatics proofs results ? how much we shud trust these results ?
thes he said
" tha fact an axioms that we cud not prove ,lose its exact values when we are working in practical fields , and we turn to use approximation "
then he gave the pi example :o

Answer 76

Awesome :D

Answer 77

@ganeshie8 Comments ?

Answer 78

no comments.
except the obvious observation that the author is weak and a pervert :
he is using logic - which is a branch of mathematics itself - to defend carelessly some junk statement that 'math is weak'. i feel u r wasting money+time reading such meaningless arguments...

Answer 79

:D lool, Don't worry Time Yes, Money Nope

Answer 80

if u wil search the net, u will find millions of articles on this, discussing this topic is a waste of time... continuing it any further is a punishable crime :P

Answer 81

i totaly agree with that @ganeshie8
and more over i think the weakness of using exact value of pi
is human weakness not math weakness

Answer 82

:) nice side discussion though... ty for sharing @AntarAzri

Answer 83

Thank you guys