Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail From: Ian Kelly Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Subject: Re: value of pi and 22/7 Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 23:19:41 -0600 Lines: 27 Message-ID: References: <91940d31-1ff4-4267-9b07-445eca35d234@googlegroups.com> <1466221708.3660642.641268921.0131CAF9@webmail.messagingengine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: news.uni-berlin.de MYAj7SRYVISZopYeDYhR6A+czzatzvpwaamVOEea+CjA== Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.060 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.88; '*S*': 0.00; '"my': 0.09; 'missed': 0.15; '"about': 0.16; '1900': 0.16; '2016': 0.16; '4:25': 0.16; 'gregory': 0.16; 'measurement': 0.16; 'nearest': 0.16; 'received:io': 0.16; 'received:psf.io': 0.16; 'terribly': 0.16; 'with;': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; "wouldn't": 0.16; 'received:209.85.214.174': 0.22; "aren't": 0.22; 'precise': 0.22; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; "doesn't": 0.26; 'message- id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.27; 'measure': 0.29; 'sure,': 0.29; "they'll": 0.29; 'subject:/': 0.30; 'probably': 0.31; 'doubt': 0.33; 'point,': 0.33; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'received:209.85': 0.36; "wasn't": 0.36; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'really': 0.37; 'say': 0.37; 'things': 0.38; 'received:209': 0.38; 'mean': 0.38; "didn't": 0.39; 'received:209.85.214': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.40; 'still': 0.40; 'body': 0.61; 'more': 0.63; 'audience.': 0.66; 'remember,': 0.66; 'talking': 0.67; 'today.': 0.67; 'square': 0.76; 'cares.': 0.84; 'footprint': 0.84; 'nowadays,': 0.84; 'subject:value': 0.84; 'to:name:python': 0.84 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=bzWbVIMbxswjEHZueIxhLNTsnz3v89DuYJz/UlZt5iQ=; b=ZZVYSeCl87OUKn99iXghhRGgG06oaR55vK4vnvBevNvYY7+yH7v+gdCX1LsQ2G0ufZ YypIE4TP4sZBhak5l0QOyHioYHOn9WbFzNYwP0JUja/HiKBxJ+tEHdO1OKfXwfEv0i89 5imFXuS0YY+gIsA0EDUvvA2sd2GqtfRooAbNt031pn6gLL11kkWgXX+4SgMwZl2cIczw 2qRm/+X9DV6mY6t0TOq21o1iiyziV1e+LuFFUBWRHaQTwpQGSsoK0B9ZKFN0eLxNQIl+ LwFjUoZde7N1CfrI9wVMRYQnz/eyJ4Uk+fXcbS/xnABeFIUkLT4sYA6FMSPc8ekKa9n4 b2UA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=bzWbVIMbxswjEHZueIxhLNTsnz3v89DuYJz/UlZt5iQ=; b=bcdHAD1V7ekr3Q2cNsEn+1r1qj3D28+G1skaWbW7j160QL5Xg9XUnjFLTxDC3Idgfa LkFgtUt3bNQ2494X/w2BKPDNVx2HTbQIIblnaARDAugnqWbNFEokVDBJs8cWZSYvd2Nm xtE0fZ00HQWntjSojPauyyxA2X/8b9kiWNhuMMurc7cYRxWZtCKajQ5CDKHyB0q+R05T 6iN8jvIidU8pjUsY1oHTKa7V+ARS5AI2f0JSq+2pkbVuuA5OBSCZeHnGlLnBusiTlWnr 3ndt3Ve5vQKK157x+uGKcFTDJfPdjmnsjkOFCRHcyAM4pUFp38+PQpp9IgDTM9JY9xo+ RvVQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJA17V8Bti8J1F/5zOMGeeYknPHoXc9CmFtVcy32m06q1p8DWunkFpHUyv/Mr4c6PTGM0/pI4w4zvZE8A== X-Received: by 10.157.39.110 with SMTP id r101mr7338396ota.187.1466400021194; Sun, 19 Jun 2016 22:20:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Mailman-Original-Message-ID: X-Mailman-Original-References: <91940d31-1ff4-4267-9b07-445eca35d234@googlegroups.com> <1466221708.3660642.641268921.0131CAF9@webmail.messagingengine.com> Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:110174 On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Gregory Ewing wrote: > Ian Kelly wrote: >> >> Remember, the cubit was based on the length of the >> forearm, so it's not like it was a terribly precise measurement to >> begin with; > > > Let's not sell them short. Just because it was based on a forearm > doesn't mean they didn't have a precise standard for it, any more > than people who measure things in "feet" do it by plonking down > their own foot. > > No doubt it wasn't as precise as what we have nowadays, but > it was probably a lot better than human body part variations. Sure, but I think you've missed my central point, which is not that they wouldn't have made reasonably precise measurements in construction, but only that the storytellers would have rounded things off for their audience. We still do the same thing today. A house appraisal will report its footprint to the nearest square foot, but most people when talking about it casually aren't going to say "my house is 1936 square feet". More likely they'll just say "about 1900 square feet", since past the first couple of digits nobody really cares.