The piano music for each digit at the A-π (API) page is particularly beautiful https://pi.delivery/#demosmusic
Literally this should contain all the songs written, and the ones haven't written yet.
Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
101–110 of 118 posts
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#102Did they find the patterns (circle?) that was referend at the end of Carl Sagan’s Contact book?
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#103Meh, throwing raw power at the problem is not that impressive. Bellard's [1] 2009 record was much more impressive, because he used a clever formula to break the existing record with a mere (albeit beefy) desktop computer: https://bellard.org/pi/pi2700e9/ The record he broke with his desktop PC was made using a supercomputer cluster. [1] If somebody is not familiar with him, he is also the original author of QEMU, ffm…
And JSLinux - full PC emulation in your browser (this never ceases to amaze me no matter how often I play with it): https://bellard.org/jslinux/
There are quite a bit of other very impressive projects under their belt as well. QEMU and FFMPEG to name some I use daily. What a legend.
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
Pi can be proven to be an irrational number: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_%CF%80_is_irrationa...
Quick question. Is 22/7 an approximate value of pie? What is the correct formula and why?
22/7 is an approximation for pi. I prefer to use 355/113, which has an error of about 2.7x10^-7. The reason these are good approximations is that they’re convergents for the continued fraction for pi. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continued_fraction
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the concept of [a "normal" number][0] (which is a strange choice of word, I think). Apparently pi is not proven to be normal. But the implication as I understand is that, yes, any given sequence that you'd care to look for is there somewhere. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_number
Almost all numbers are normal, so it seems like a perfectly reasonable choice of terminology =) [On the other hand, almost none of the numbers someone on the street might name are normal, so ...]
Offhand, I would guess that “normal” is the most overloaded word in mathematics. We should probably use it less.
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#106Meh, throwing raw power at the problem is not that impressive. Bellard's [1] 2009 record was much more impressive, because he used a clever formula to break the existing record with a mere (albeit beefy) desktop computer: https://bellard.org/pi/pi2700e9/ The record he broke with his desktop PC was made using a supercomputer cluster. [1] If somebody is not familiar with him, he is also the original author of QEMU, ffm…
Yeah, not particularly impressive. The main outcome of this was to give the record to a woman.
[deleted]
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#107Meh, throwing raw power at the problem is not that impressive. Bellard's [1] 2009 record was much more impressive, because he used a clever formula to break the existing record with a mere (albeit beefy) desktop computer: https://bellard.org/pi/pi2700e9/ The record he broke with his desktop PC was made using a supercomputer cluster. [1] If somebody is not familiar with him, he is also the original author of QEMU, ffm…
Yeah, not particularly impressive. The main outcome of this was to give the record to a woman.
If you keep posting flamebait we're going to ban you again.
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not necessarily. A double gets you pretty far into pi for a cost of just 8 bytes. A little bit of rounding, or checksumming, or other tomfoolery in principle should make it possible to reach absurdly far into pi for a byte or two more.
Given that I personally have to have seen this proposal at least a dozen times myself, and I'm not even particularly "in the field", if it was as easy as people supposed, we'd be using it. I will point out you're thinking of it incorrectly, though. The challenge with compression isn't to "reach far into pi". The challenge is to reach correctly into pi. A double can identify 2^64 places to reach into pi. It doesn't re…
I would expect that about zero of the propositions have ever been serious. It's just a well-known, long-running amusement among programmers.
An IEEE 754 double type has a range from about 10^−324 to about 10^308. You start losing precision once you exceed 2^51, but beyond that it should be possible to add an extra byte or a few as an offset.
So a handful of bytes would get us addresses far in excess of the current storage capacity of the internet (estimated around 10^24 bytes a few years ago) ... if only pi were certain to contain every possible number sequence up to some arbitrary length (which last I heard isn't known yet) and if we had some reasonable way to search and index all of that content (which we don't).
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#109"we have lots of compute resources and access to software, aren't we awesome?"
Re: Calculating a record-breaking 31.4T digits of Pi with GCP
#110You don't get those gigajoules of heat waste back at the end