Monday, March 7, 2011

Pi = 4 ... What the ... $%?!


I have to thank Pat Ballew at Pat's Blog for stretching my mental muscles today.

See if you can figure out the fallacy in the above cartoon, and if not click here for the explanation. Nice one. :-)

3 comments:

Phil Warnell said...

Hi Steven,

The answer is simple, have you never been told that you can’t square a circle or is that you can’t circle a square:-)

Best,

Phil

Steven Colyer said...

Aye Laddie, Have Ye No Heard 'tis impossible to do either, the First Church of the Circle being forever at war with the First Church of the Square, though forever and a day there are those who wish to find peace amongst them, as I meself did as a wee young lad once upon a time? Tis a fairy tale and fable they should ever be united, much like the banshee, so sayeth Lebesque.

Two jokes for you, good sir:

So? Maybe it IS four! The Babylonians got it wrong when they guessimated it was 3, but at least they were off by ONLY 33.33 infinite 3's percent ... and that's not bad!

and

Speaking as an Engineer, I have no problem with pi being 4, as we like to add on factors of safety. In fact, just to be on the safer side, make it 5.

Phil Warnell said...

Hi Steven,

So are you suggesting from an engineer’s perspective the difference between 4 and 3.14159...... is a matter of tolerance? If that being true I would say it goes to prove that engineer’s are more tolerant souls then mathematicians:-) Then again when it comes to such things I like definitions which have the circle as the least perimeter required to enclose the greatest area, rather than it being the set of points in a plane that are equidistant from a given point. That being the latter only provides a means for its construction, while the former more revealing of its utility or more simply its quality.

Best,

Phil