dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) (12/12/90)
printf("Hello world\n");
Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated?
Does anyone know if this task is still being persued?
--
David Corcoran -@@
uunet!aspect!dave ~
In a society where anything goes eventually everything will.quodling@bunyip.enet.dec.com (12/12/90)
In article <7063@aspect.UUCP>, dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes: > printf("Hello world\n"); > > > Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated? > > Does anyone know if this task is still being persued? > -- > David Corcoran -@@ > uunet!aspect!dave ~ > In a society where anything goes eventually everything will. IN excess of 33,000,000 places, as I recall, there are several different algorithms that have been used. Most organizations that have been involved in calulating pi, have given up through lack of interest and / or significant return. Send mail, if you want pointers to some of the more recent papers on calculating pi. Actually, nothing significant has happened for a few years... -- Peter Quodling Internet: quodling@blumon.enet.dec.com Digital Equipment Corporation UUCP: ...!decwrl!blumon.enet!quodling Nashua, NH. I disclaim everything!!!
brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) (12/12/90)
In article <1990Dec11.160047.1@bunyip.enet.dec.com> quodling@bunyip.enet.dec.com writes: > In article <7063@aspect.UUCP>, dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes: > > Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated? [ ... ] > Actually, nothing significant has happened for a few years... Actually, the Chudnovskys recently jumped into the pi game with a Ramanujan-type formula, and beat Kanada in the race to 10^9 digits. That's rather significant to anyone who knows anything about the field. ---Dan
tighe@convex.com (Mike Tighe) (12/13/90)
In article <7063@aspect.UUCP> dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes: >printf("Hello world\n"); >Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated? 201,326,000 places according to Yasumasa Kanada. This was published in the Proceedings of Superocmputing 88. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- Mike Tighe, Internet: tighe@convex.com Voice: (214) 497-4206 Fax: (214) 497-4550 -----------------------------------------------------------
horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) (12/13/90)
In article <7063@aspect.UUCP> dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes:
<
<Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated?
The last figure I heard was 5,000,000 digits by a group in Japan.
<Does anyone know if this task is still being persued?
Of course it's still being pursued. The task of getting more and more digits
of pi has been pursued for thousands of years, with no sign of stopping.
What about memorising digits of pi? I know only about 400 digits. Any other
netters want to compete? :-)
--Scott
--
Scott Horne ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne
horne@cs.Yale.edu SnailMail: Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520
203 436-1817 Residence: Rm 1817 Silliman College, Yale Univ
Uneasy lies the head that wears the _gao1 mao4zi_.brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu (12/13/90)
The last I heard, about 2 years ago, but a in Japan they had calculated it to 2
billion decimal places and it keeps going and going and ...
brian
{signature on strike}brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu (12/13/90)
DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ALGORITHEM TO CALCULATE PI TO THE NTH DECIMAL
mail would be great, but a post would be adeqate.
thanx
brian
{signature on strike}noesis@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (60276000) (12/14/90)
OK, how about someone providing a method of calcing pi? i'm using
p=2
s=0
do
s=sqrt(s+2)
p=2*p/s
while (s < 2)
where p converges to pi as s converges to 2 but i'm interested in
any other algorhythms out therejohne@hp-vcd.HP.COM (John Eaton) (12/14/90)
<<<< < IN excess of 33,000,000 places, as I recall, there are several different < algorithms that have been used. Most organizations that have been involved in < calulating pi, have given up through lack of interest and / or significant < return. ---------- Nope, its Federal Law. Calculating Pi is a very dangerous operaton. What if some researcher discovers that Pi repeats after 100,000,000,000 digits? The universe as we know it would then cease to exist. Congress was made aware of this and passed a law prohibiting the calculation of Pi past ten million digits. The only organization authorized to conduct research in this area is a special branch of the Armys Doomsday Machine research operation. They have machines designed so even if one discovers the answer that it will not tell anyone about it. John Eaton !hpvcfs1!johne
userAKDU@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Al Dunbar) (12/14/90)
In article <110863@convex.convex.com>, tighe@convex.com (Mike Tighe) writes: >In article <7063@aspect.UUCP> dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes: >>printf("Hello world\n"); > >>Does anyone know to how many places has PI been calculated? > >201,326,000 places according to Yasumasa Kanada. This was published in the >Proceedings of Superocmputing 88. At our house it only gets calculated to, at most, eight places. Unfortunately, you don't get much desert that way :-) -------------------+------------------------------------------- Al Dunbar | Edmonton, Alberta | "this mind left intentionally blank" CANADA | - Manuel Writer -------------------+-------------------------------------------
lerman@stpstn.UUCP (Ken Lerman) (12/14/90)
In article <10071@darkstar.ucsc.edu> noesis@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (60276000) writes: > >OK, how about someone providing a method of calcing pi? i'm using > p=2 > s=0 > do > s=sqrt(s+2) > p=2*p/s > while (s < 2) > where p converges to pi as s converges to 2 but i'm interested in >any other algorhythms out there I usually get myself a square dartboard two feet on a side and inscribe a circle with a radius of one foot. Then, by throwing darts at the board and counting the ratio of darts which are inside the circle to darts which hit the board, I can easily calculate pi. Of course, this technique is only usable by those who are as bad at darts as your average random number generator. :-) Ken
gary@ncar.ucar.EDU (Gary Strand) (12/15/90)
> "brian" (brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu) > DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ALGORITHEM TO CALCULATE PI TO THE NTH DECIMAL Unless you've got a Cray and some very sophisticated algorithms, I don't think you would get past the accuracy of your machine, in a timely fashion. -- Gary Strand There is only one success -- to be able Internet: strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu to spend your life in your own way. Voicenet: (303) 497-1336 - Christopher Morley
bill@videovax.tv.tek.com (William K. McFadden) (12/15/90)
In article <27769@cs.yale.edu> horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) writes: >In article <7063@aspect.UUCP> dave@aspect.UUCP (Dave Corcoran) writes: >What about memorising digits of pi? I know only about 400 digits. Any other >netters want to compete? :-) I've only managed to remember 30 digits: 3.14159265358979323846264338327 (I hope I've remembered correctly :-) I've never really needed more than 3 digits, though. -- Bill McFadden Tektronix, Inc. P.O. Box 500 MS 58-639 Beaverton, OR 97077 bill@videovax.tv.tek.com, {hplabs,uw-beaver,decvax}!tektronix!videovax!bill Phone: (503) 627-6920 "The biggest difference between developing a missle component and a toy is the 'cost constraint.'" -- John Anderson, Engineer, TI
hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) (12/15/90)
In article <9554@ncar.ucar.edu>, gary@ncar.ucar.EDU (Gary Strand) writes: > > "brian" (brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu) > > DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ALGORITHEM TO CALCULATE PI TO THE NTH DECIMAL > Unless you've got a Cray and some very sophisticated algorithms, I don't > think you would get past the accuracy of your machine, in a timely fashion. Not so, if you mean the "built-in" accuracy. Getting quite a few thousand digits is no real problem. You do need good integer arithmetic algorithms. -- Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399 Phone: (317)494-6054 hrubin@l.cc.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet) {purdue,pur-ee}!l.cc!hrubin(UUCP)
spaf@cs.purdue.EDU (Gene Spafford) (12/16/90)
For those people interested in algorithms to calculate Pi, let me
suggest the following book:
Pi and the AGM: A Study in Analytic Number Theory and Computational
Complexity
by Jonathan M. Borwein and Peter B. Borwein
Wiley-Interscience, 1987
ISBN 0-471-83138-7
The AGM in the article is the arithmetic-geometric mean iteration
method of Gauss, Lagrange and Legendre.
From the book:
First recorded attempt to calculate Pi was 2000 BC
As of July 1986 (just prior to publication) Kanada had calculated
2**25 decimal digits of Pi using an algorithm that is described in the book.
I assume his later results use a modification of the same algorithm.
--
Gene Spafford
NSF/Purdue/U of Florida Software Engineering Research Center,
Dept. of Computer Sciences, Purdue University, W. Lafayette IN 47907-2004
Internet: spaf@cs.purdue.edu uucp: ...!{decwrl,gatech,ucbvax}!purdue!spafroy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (12/16/90)
This may be a silly question, but other than "because it's there",
why have people spent so much time (and money) calculating PI?
--
Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute
455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy
"Arcane? Did you say arcane? It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"Richard.Milward@samba.acs.unc.edu (Richard Milward) (12/17/90)
An interesting and simple approximation to pi is 355/113, which is accurate to about 10**-6. See also _The Story of Pi_ (or is it _The Book of Pi_?) (I'll post the real name, author, etc. tomorrow...) --Richard Milward / network tech / UNC-CH / ODVC Office of Data & Video Communications "Your desires flow through our wires."
jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) (12/17/90)
In article <1942@beguine.UUCP> Richard.Milward@samba.acs.unc.edu (Richard Milward) writes: >An interesting and simple approximation to pi is >355/113, which is accurate to about 10**-6. Useful if you need to keep everything in integers, but otherwise you might as well just learn 3.141593. If you ever need more precision, it'll be easier to extend that knowledge to get 3.1415926536 than it will be to hunt up 312689/99532. -- J Greely (jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu; osu-cis!jgreely)
roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (12/17/90)
J Greely <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: > you might as well just learn 3.141593. This may be silly, but I learned to memorise the first few digits of PI in high school by the nice pattern they made on the keyboard of my SR-10 calculator: 7 8 9 / 4 5 6 | / / 1 2 3 0 . You have to remember the "3." youself, but after that, it's up from the 1, then diagonal from the 1, then diagonal from the 2. On the other hand, e doesn't make such a nice pattern (that I noticed), so as far as I remember, e is just 2.something. -- Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 455 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016 roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- {att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy "Arcane? Did you say arcane? It wouldn't be Unix if it wasn't arcane!"
dbell@cup.portal.com (David J Bell) (12/18/90)
Roy Smith, (Public Health Research Institute) showed his mnemonic for PI, then said: > On the other >hand, e doesn't make such a nice pattern (that I noticed), so as far as I >remember, e is just 2.something. I dunno - the numeric pad pattern for e isn't that bad: 7 8 9 4 5 6 1 2 3 0 Now: e = 2.7182817, approximately. 2, diagonally to 7, drop to 1, diagonally to 8, drop to 2, directly to 8, back to 1, and directly to 7. You've just drawn the major diagonals and vertical edges of the 1-2-8-7 rectangle... Dave dbell@cup.portal.com
herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) (12/18/90)
In article <9554@ncar.ucar.edu>, gary@ncar.ucar.EDU (Gary Strand) writes: >> "brian" (brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu) > >> DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ALGORITHEM TO CALCULATE PI TO THE NTH DECIMAL > > Unless you've got a Cray and some very sophisticated algorithms, I don't > think you would get past the accuracy of your machine, in a timely fashion. The multiple precision algorithms may be sophisticated, but they are there in Knuth's The Art of Computer Programming. You can find some interesting early work on the calculation of large numbers by browsing through Scripta Mathematica from the days of Jekuthiel Ginsberg's editorship. It carried reports of work on rotary mechanical calculators generating the first 17 Mersenne numbers, for example. Someone helped that gentleman calculate two numbers whose product is the 18th, or something near it, on one of those electronic doodads. I found Scripta Mathematica interesting recreational reading until Ginsberg died. When his backlog was used up it became another of those journals that carry papers that only ten people in the world can read. The good issues are from the 1950s and early '60s. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) (12/18/90)
In article <1990Dec17.150257.3890@phri.nyu.edu>, roy@phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) writes: > J Greely <jgreely@cis.ohio-state.edu> writes: [clever mnemonic for pi omitted] > On the other > hand, e doesn't make such a nice pattern (that I noticed), so as far as I > remember, e is just 2.something. e is 2 . 1828 1828 45 90 45 ... That's the part that has the simple mnemonic structure. You have to memorize something to remember more. As undergraduates, a couple of us computed e to 9845 decimals. That was the amount that would fit twice into the 20000 digits of the IBM 1620 we did it on while leaving room for the add table and the program. We told Professor Mielke what we had done and he showed us a nice fresh paper in Mathematical Tables and Other Aids to Computation, by someone at the David Taylor Model Basin (whose name I've been trying to remember since this thread began) about the calculation of pi to 100,000 decimals. A footnote offhandedly announced that they had also calculated e to the same precision "by the obvious algorithm". I have a nice letter from him and a reprint of the MTOC paper. And a listing of our results which confirmed his first ten thousand places. dan herrick herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) (12/18/90)
In article <2473.276cffce@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>, I said > > e is 2 . 1828 1828 45 90 45 ... > > That's the part that has the simple mnemonic structure. You have to > memorize something to remember more. > One of the things you have to memorize is that there is a 7 in there, try e is 2 . 7 1828 1828 45 90 45 ... > still, even with egg on my face, > dan herrick > herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) (12/19/90)
In article <2481.276de257@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>, herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) writes: > In article <2473.276cffce@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>, I said >> >> e is 2 . 1828 1828 45 90 45 ... >> >> That's the part that has the simple mnemonic structure. You have to >> memorize something to remember more. >> > One of the things you have to memorize is that there is a 7 in there, > try > > e is 2 . 7 1828 1828 45 90 45 ... >> > still, even with egg on my face, >> dan herrick >> herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com When I admitted my gaffe here, someone passed this along to me: How I wish I could recapture pi.... Eureka! cried the great inventor. Christmas pudding, Christmas pie Is at the problem's very center. [Hint: number of letters in each word mean something. ]
karl@ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) (12/19/90)
In article <10071@darkstar.ucsc.edu> noesis@ucscb.UCSC.EDU (60276000) writes: >OK, how about someone providing a method of calcing pi? i'm using > p=2; s=0; do s=sqrt(s+2); p=2*p/s; while (s < 2) I use p=atan(1)*4, which gives me the answer in one iteration. :-) :-) Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@ima.isc.com or uunet!ima!karl), The Walking Lint
Richard.Milward@samba (Richard Milward) (12/19/90)
Ok, so I'm a day or 2 late... The book I attempted to refer to is _A History of Pi_ by Petr Beckmann, St. Martin's Press, (c) 1971 Library of Congress catalog card no. 74-32539 (no ISBN number listed) Chapter titles include: Euclid; Archimedes of Syracuse; Newton; Euler; The Monte Carlo Method; and The Computer Age. (A bit old, but fascinating.) A bibliography and chronological table are included along with a listing of the 1st 10,000 digits. A mention of the 1897 attempt by the Indiana House of Representatives to legislate the value of pi is also included. Lots of approximation methods. No mnemonic aids. (See _Scientific American_ May '82 p.32 in _Metamagical Themas_ column for some of that.) Joe Bob gives it a shrug -- I think it's okay :-) --Richard Milward / UNC-CH / network tech Almost forgot: using only 1-ohm resistors, how many will it take, in any electrical network, to approximate pi to within 10^^-6 ? I'll post some answers next week...
horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) (12/19/90)
In article <2486.276dfd25@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) writes:
<
<How I wish I could recapture pi....
<Eureka! cried the great inventor.
<Christmas pudding, Christmas pie
<Is at the problem's very center.
<
<[Hint: number of letters in each word mean something.
<]
The `at' doesn't belong. So much for that mnemonic. Oh, well, there are
many more where that came from. See Bergmann's book. I know a few that
even he doesn't list (though I don't use them myself).
The longest one I've seen is in Chinese. It's a poem (if you can call it that)
in which each character sounds like the corresponding digit in the decimal
expansion. (The decimal point is included.) Unfortunately, I don't remember
where I saw this. Could someone send me a reference? (A pointer to a Chinese
book is OK; I read Chinese.)
--Scott
--
Scott Horne ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne
horne@cs.Yale.edu SnailMail: Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520
203 436-1817 Residence: Rm 1817 Silliman College, Yale Univ
Uneasy lies the head that wears the _gao1 mao4zi_.dbell@cup.portal.com (David J Bell) (12/19/90)
>--Richard Milward / UNC-CH / network tech >Almost forgot: using only 1-ohm resistors, how many will >it take, in any electrical network, to approximate pi >to within 10^^-6 ? I'll post some answers next week... Well, 40115 of the little devils would do it... Actually, that would give accuracy to about 1 part in 10^8. Sort of like the time a friend was bar hopping years ago, here in Silicon Valley. He ran into this girl who worked in mark-and-pack at the end of the assembly line at a local I.C. manufacturer. They talked a while, maybe even on a coule of nights, and she told him that she could "get him any I.C.s he wanted", right off the line. Well, "Hell!" he says; why not. Tells her he could use whatever 7400s she could get. (Yeah this *was* a while back!) Couple weeks later, he runs into her again and she says that she has something in the car for him. Yep. About 2000 Seventy Four Zero Zeroes... Now, isn't there a theorem that proves that you can build ANY logic system, using only 2-input NAND gates? Dave dbell@cup.portal.com (Oh yeah - spoiler: Put 113 strings in parallel, each with 355 1 Ohm resistors...)
ts74113@kaarne.tut.fi (Timo Saarinen OH3YN) (12/19/90)
In article <2486.276dfd25@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) writes: >When I admitted my gaffe here, someone passed this along to me: > >How I wish I could recapture pi.... > >Eureka! cried the great inventor. > >Christmas pudding, Christmas pie > >Is at the problem's very center. > >[Hint: number of letters in each word mean something. >] One day, one friend of mine told me how to remember the value of pi with fifteen digits: How I need a drink. Alcoholic, of course - after the heavy chapters describing quantum mechanics. +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | - InterNet : ts74113@tut.fi | There's never enough time to do all | | - HamRadio : OH3YN@OH3TR.FIN.EU | the nothing you want! (Calvin&Hobbes) | +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) (12/20/90)
In article <JGREELY.90Dec17023300@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu>, jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) writes: > you might as well just learn 3.141593. From "The Lure of the Limerick": 'Tis a favorite value of mine, A new value of PI to assign, I would set it at three, for it's simpler, you see, Than three point one four five nine! -- Mark Harrison harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (214)518-5050 {necntc, cs.utexas.edu}!necssd!harrison standard disclaimers apply...
merriam@nas.nasa.gov (Marshal L. Merriam) (12/20/90)
It you liked that one, you can find it and several others in Scientific American, page 24, October 1985. The best was How I wish I could enumerate pi easily, since all these frigging mnemonics prevent recalling any of pi's sequence more simply. (For those that haven't got it yet, the number of letters in each word indicate the successive digits of $\pi$.) I really enjoyed Petr Beckman's book "A History Of $\Pi$". (By the way, my copy was copyright 1970,1971 by The Golem Press, ISBN: 0-911762-12-4, LCCCN: 79-166154) It does contain some of these poems (on page 105 in my copy,indexed under poems coding $\pi$) in English, French, and German. Fortunately, "The 32nd digit of $\Pi$ is zero, so that this kind of poetry is mecifully nipped in the bud." - Marshal L. Merriam
scott@hpcvca.CV.HP.COM (Scott Linn) (12/20/90)
>When I admitted my gaffe here, someone passed this along to me: How I wish I could recapture pi.... 3. 1 4 1 5 9 2 Eureka! cried the great inventor. 6 5 3 5 8 Christmas pudding, Christmas pie 9 7 9 3 Is at the problem's very center. 2 2 3 8 4 6 ^ Extra digit >[Hint: number of letters in each word mean something.] But, it's WRONG. Scott Linn
horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) (12/20/90)
In article <1979@beguine.UUCP> Richard.Milward@samba (Richard Milward) writes:
<
<Ok, so I'm a day or 2 late...
<The book I attempted to refer to is _A History of Pi_
<by Petr Beckmann, St. Martin's Press, (c) 1971
<Library of Congress catalog card no. 74-32539
<(no ISBN number listed)
It's pretty good, except for the anti-socialist propaganda....
<Lots of approximation methods. No mnemonic aids.
My copy (third edition) includes three or four mnemonic aids, including some
for French and German. And I wouldn't say that it contains "[l]ots of
approximation methods"; there are much better sources.
<Almost forgot: using only 1-ohm resistors, how many will
<it take, in any electrical network, to approximate pi
<to within 10^^-6 ? I'll post some answers next week...
One. Cut out a strip of paper of width twice the length of the resistor,
draw a line down the middle,.... :-)
--Scott
--
Scott Horne ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne
horne@cs.Yale.edu SnailMail: Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520
203 436-1817 Residence: Rm 1817 Silliman College, Yale Univ
Uneasy lies the head that wears the _gao1 mao4zi_.horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) (12/20/90)
In article <591@necssd.NEC.COM> harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) writes: >In article <JGREELY.90Dec17023300@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu>, <jgreely@morganucodon.cis.ohio-state.edu (J Greely) writes: << you might as well just learn 3.141593. < <From "The Lure of the Limerick": < < 'Tis a favorite value of mine, < A new value of PI to assign, < I would set it at three, < for it's simpler, you see, < Than three point one four five nine! First, it's "three point one four ONE five nine" ("two six five three..."). Your knowledge of poetry, if not of pi, should've told you that. Second, I hope no one mistakenly supposes that the lengths of the words in that limerick represent the first few digits of pi. `[F]avorite' spoils it. Third, setting it at three is a foolish idea which has been tried many times throughout history. (Some have even tried to set it at four!) --Scott -- Scott Horne ...!{harvard,cmcl2,decvax}!yale!horne horne@cs.Yale.edu SnailMail: Box 7196 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520 203 436-1817 Residence: Rm 1817 Silliman College, Yale Univ Uneasy lies the head that wears the _gao1 mao4zi_.
harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) (12/22/90)
In article <27895@cs.yale.edu>, horne-scott@cs.yale.edu (Scott Horne) writes: > In article <591@necssd.NEC.COM> harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (Mark Harrison) writes: > < 'Tis a favorite value of mine, > < A new value of PI to assign, > < I would set it at three, > < for it's simpler, you see, > < Than three point one four five nine! > First, it's "three point one four ONE five nine" ("two six five three..."). > Your knowledge of poetry, if not of pi, should've told you that. I screwed up... yes, there should be a "one" there... also, in checking the original, "value" in the first line should read "project"... apologies to all... > Third, setting it at three is a foolish idea which has been tried many times > throughout history. (Some have even tried to set it at four!) It's a joke. Please DO NOT take it seriously. Special to Scott: I *like* the anti-socialist propoganda in "A History of Pi". :-) -- Mark Harrison harrison@necssd.NEC.COM (214)518-5050 {necntc, cs.utexas.edu}!necssd!harrison standard disclaimers apply...
ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin) (12/22/90)
In article <2486.276dfd25@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) writes: > >How I wish I could recapture pi.... >Eureka! cried the great inventor. >Christmas pudding, Christmas pie >Is at the problem's very center. Ludolph van Ceulen spent much time calculating pi to 35 (?) decimal places. He also wrote a verse (in Latin) for remembering the first 32. Unfortunately I have forgotten how it went ... :-) -- Anders Thulin ath@prosys.se {uunet,mcsun}!sunic!prosys!ath Telesoft Europe AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
carvin@sud509.ed.ray.com (Mike Carvin) (12/28/90)
In article <2472.276cfc77@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> herrickd@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (daniel lance herrick) writes: >In article <9554@ncar.ucar.edu>, gary@ncar.ucar.EDU (Gary Strand) writes: >>> "brian" (brpleshek@miavx0.ham.muohio.edu) >> >>> DOES ANYONE HAVE AN ALGORITHEM TO CALCULATE PI TO THE NTH DECIMAL >> I kinda like the following myself: How I need a drink! Alcoholic, of course, after all night studying quantum mechanics! Counting the letters in each word, you get: 3.1415926535879 -- ======================================================================== Mike Carvin | mec@world.std.com | carvin@sud509.ed.ray.com ========================================================================