Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

tauday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 159 posts

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#51

Post by steveklabnik »

tc wrote: post #2

Perfect; to my lisp startup file was just added: (defconstant tau #.(* 2 pi)) Regarding adoption, I think it's worth pointing out that these sorts of conventions can and do shift within a generation. I recall quite clearly while growing up the convention for indicating years = the year one [1] was B.C. and A.D. It seems like over the past few years we've definitively decided on B.C.E. and C.E. instead [2]. All it rea…

Ugh, I know this is slightly offtopic, but there's nothing more I dislike than B.C.E and C.E. I can understand not trying to promote a Christian-centric worldview, but by only changing the labels, they accomplish nothing. Now, the birth of Christ sets a 'common era,' which arguable makes it _more_ 'offensive' than just acknowledging what happened on that particular day.

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#52

Post by est »

steveklabnik wrote: post #5
mikecane wrote: post #4

I'm just about a math retard, so 99.9% of that went right by me. My only question is this. Pi is supposed to be an infinite number: 3.14... So what would Tau be? Is it also infinite or finite? I didn't see that addressed -- or I somehow missed it in my concentrated skim. TIA.

> infinite number The term you're looking for is 'irrational.' And tau is also irrational.

> The term you're looking for is 'irrational.'

I think by infinite he means non-terminating.

Conversely, an irrational number always has a non-terminating non-repeating decimal representation.

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#56

Post by mikecane »

mikecane wrote: post #4

I'm just about a math retard, so 99.9% of that went right by me. My only question is this. Pi is supposed to be an infinite number: 3.14... So what would Tau be? Is it also infinite or finite? I didn't see that addressed -- or I somehow missed it in my concentrated skim. TIA.

Thanks, everyone for the replies.

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#58

Post by Groxx »

amalcon wrote: post #38
tc wrote: post #2

Perfect; to my lisp startup file was just added: (defconstant tau #.(* 2 pi)) Regarding adoption, I think it's worth pointing out that these sorts of conventions can and do shift within a generation. I recall quite clearly while growing up the convention for indicating years = the year one [1] was B.C. and A.D. It seems like over the past few years we've definitively decided on B.C.E. and C.E. instead [2]. All it rea…

I have no problem with people trying to do this in principle. I really don't care enough, but other people can. The symbol "tau", however, is an especially poor choice for a trigonometric symbol, because it's also used for torque. You won't get many physics teachers to change over if every time you try to calculate a torque from a force and radius, you run into a symbol conflict.

How many symbols aren't in use, though? If you've got a notably better one, the "manifesto" may consider changing, but they seem (to me) to have pretty good reasons for choosing tau.

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#59

Post by chc »

lutorm wrote: post #46
jerf wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're operating under the wrong definition of "wrong". Axioms and definitions simply exist, but we are not therefore obligated to suspend all judgment on which ones are better for some purpose. I can reformulate all of physics to accept the Earth as a constant reference frame. It will be isomorphic to current physics based on being set in inertial reference frames, and therefore every bit as "correct" as conventiona…

No, no, no. Your Earth-centered physics is not wrong. It's perhaps "bad", or "awkward", "clumsy" or "suboptimal", but not wrong. The word wrong should be reserved for factually incorrect statements (unless you are discussing morals), otherwise it's been diluted to meaninglessness. It's better. See, you already agree with me. It's not "right", it may be "better" (though I question that fact, too.)

"Wrong" can mean "factually incorrect", but it can also mean "poorly suited." For example, outfits do not have a property of factual correctness, but somebody wearing a tux to a semiformal event would be wearing the wrong thing, as would somebody wearing a speedo.

Re: No, really, pi is wrong: The Tau Manifesto (Tau Day, 2010)

#60

Post by ScotterC »

amalcon wrote: post #38
tc wrote: post #2

Perfect; to my lisp startup file was just added: (defconstant tau #.(* 2 pi)) Regarding adoption, I think it's worth pointing out that these sorts of conventions can and do shift within a generation. I recall quite clearly while growing up the convention for indicating years = the year one [1] was B.C. and A.D. It seems like over the past few years we've definitively decided on B.C.E. and C.E. instead [2]. All it rea…

I have no problem with people trying to do this in principle. I really don't care enough, but other people can. The symbol "tau", however, is an especially poor choice for a trigonometric symbol, because it's also used for torque. You won't get many physics teachers to change over if every time you try to calculate a torque from a force and radius, you run into a symbol conflict.

My first thought exactly. Mechanical engineers and physicists appreciate where Tau is at the moment. But as someone notes, there is always symbol conflicts.
Post reply on HN