The Tau Manifesto • Hacker News Board

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#11

Post by fdej » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:04 PM UTC

Both tau and pi are inconvenient because you often need fractional multiples like 1/6 or 3/4.

We should instead take the fundamental unit of angle measurement to be pi divided by a highly composite number, say 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 5 = 180. Most common angles will be then be integer multiples of this unit. Let's give this unit a name, say "degree".

One full rotation = 360 "degrees"

Half a rotation = 180 "degrees"

1/10 of a rotation = 36 "degrees"

etc.

I can't believe I'm the first person to think of this. It's so simple that even the ancient Greeks could have figured it out. I should write a full internet manifesto and try to convert the world.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#12

Post by DSMan195276 » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

amalcon wrote: post #9

This is probably the most pointless math argument. Apparently, some people consider it too cumbersome or confusing to write two glyphs instead of one, and would prefer to replace the whole thing with a single glyph. The chosen glyph happens to be one of the worst possible options, because it conflicts with torque (an angular force, which frequently appears in the same calculations as pi). This despite there being doz…

I think most of your arguments are valid, especially about the choice of glyph, tau is already used a ton. However, I think there is something to be said for the fact that, by virtue of being the ratio of C/R, there are exactly tau radians in a circle. This really does simplify the math, and gives more meaning to the constants on tau vs. pi.

There's more meaning from '3 * tau / 4' vs. '3 * pi / 2' because the constant tells you that you have exactly '3 / 4' of a circle. With pi, this is less obvious because there are '2 * pi' radians in a circle, but the 2 frequently disappears (like in my example), which leaves you with '3 / 2 of a half a circle', which isn't obvious how much that actually is. pi definitely does have it's uses when you're talking about the diameter, but when you're talking about something like radians, it makes more sense to use the ratio of circumference to radius rather then circumference to diameter. If we were using diameterians then it would make sense to use pi, since there would be exactly pi diameterians in a circle. Having them mismatched like we do creates a mess.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#13

Post by cplease » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:16 PM UTC

jackmaney wrote: post #4

http://www.thepimanifesto.com/

Thank you.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#14

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:18 PM UTC

fdej wrote: post #11

Both tau and pi are inconvenient because you often need fractional multiples like 1/6 or 3/4. We should instead take the fundamental unit of angle measurement to be pi divided by a highly composite number, say 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 5 = 180. Most common angles will be then be integer multiples of this unit. Let's give this unit a name, say "degree". One full rotation = 360 "degrees" Half a rotation = 180 "degrees" 1/10 of a…

[deleted]

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#15

Post by ebbv » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:19 PM UTC

Do we really need to do this every year? Come on.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#16

Post by wodenokoto » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:20 PM UTC

fdej wrote: post #11

Both tau and pi are inconvenient because you often need fractional multiples like 1/6 or 3/4. We should instead take the fundamental unit of angle measurement to be pi divided by a highly composite number, say 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 5 = 180. Most common angles will be then be integer multiples of this unit. Let's give this unit a name, say "degree". One full rotation = 360 "degrees" Half a rotation = 180 "degrees" 1/10 of a…

Stuff like signal processing is horrible if you try and use degrees.

I'm not even sure if calculating the area of a circle is in anyway better using degrees.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#17

Post by cplease » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:26 PM UTC

e^(τi/2) = -1

Didn't think so.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#18

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:28 PM UTC

[deleted]

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#19

Post by tomp » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:28 PM UTC

fdej wrote: post #11

Both tau and pi are inconvenient because you often need fractional multiples like 1/6 or 3/4. We should instead take the fundamental unit of angle measurement to be pi divided by a highly composite number, say 2 * 2 * 3 * 3 * 5 = 180. Most common angles will be then be integer multiples of this unit. Let's give this unit a name, say "degree". One full rotation = 360 "degrees" Half a rotation = 180 "degrees" 1/10 of a…

What happens when you have 1/7 of a rotation? There's no one multiplier that will solve all cases.

In any case, personally I think that fractions are way better, because they tell you exactly what's what.

Re: The Tau Manifesto

#20

Post by sunfish » Sat, Mar 14, 2015, 4:29 PM UTC

I distinctly remember when I was learning geometry that there were some things that never really made sense. Why was pi defined in terms of the diameter when literally everything else we learned about circles used the radius? Why did radian angles feel off by a factor of 2? When I later stumbled upon the Tau Manifesto, it felt like a lot of things fell into place. And by that time, I had also studied calculus and had a familiarity with the kinds of things that happen in formulas which relate lengths and areas, so the discussion of the circle area formula resonated as well.

Despite all the cheap dismissals one sees, this feeling of "woah, that would have actually made sense!" is a big part of what makes the Tau Manifesto popular.