Re: value of pi and 22/7

From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: value of pi and 22/7
Date	2016-06-17 23:18 -0600
Message-ID	<mailman.113.1466227147.2288.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
References	(4 earlier) <91940d31-1ff4-4267-9b07-445eca35d234@googlegroups.com> <1466221708.3660642.641268921.0131CAF9@webmail.messagingengine.com> <mailman.111.1466221711.2288.python-list@python.org> <e405ccd3-4a6c-49cd-831a-238228f917e5@googlegroups.com> <CALwzidnaRS_Ame09hwoB5HyLXk__S68918ycR2fcN-7GFxq2AA@mail.gmail.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Lawrence D’Oliveiro
<lawrencedo99@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 3:48:43 PM UTC+12, Random832 wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 17, 2016, at 19:12, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> I’m not sure how you can write “30” with one digit...
>>
>> One *significant* digit.
>
> Like some credulous past-Bronze-age tribespeople understood the concept of “significant digits” ...

I don't see why they should need to in order to measure one thing as
"thirty cubits" and another thing as "ten cubits" and write those
numbers down. 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; they might not have understood significant figures, but
they probably wouldn't have been overly concerned about the difference
between thirty and thirty-one.

Check out the rest of the chapter. Every single measurement in it
above seven is a multiple of ten.

> I wonder what the quality of their workmanship was like, if a measurement accurate to one significant digit was considered sufficient ...

You realize there can be a difference between the quality to which
something is constructed and the precision of the measurements later
used to describe it? "Threescore cubits long"  is an impressive
figure. "61 and a half cubits" doesn't do the job of communicating the
scale any better, and ultimately amounts to wasted words in what was
originally an oral tradition.

Thread

Re: value of pi and 22/7 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 16:12 -0700
  Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 17:49 -0600
    Re: value of pi and 22/7 Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-06-18 11:19 +1000
      Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2016-06-17 19:27 -0700
      Re: value of pi and 22/7 Tim Harig <timharig@eternal-september.org> - 2016-06-18 05:47 +0000
        Re: value of pi and 22/7 boB Stepp <robertvstepp@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 10:22 -0500
      Re: value of pi and 22/7 Christian Gollwitzer <auriocus@gmx.de> - 2016-06-18 09:56 +0200
  Re: value of pi and 22/7 Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2016-06-17 23:48 -0400
    Re: value of pi and 22/7 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 21:30 -0700
      Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 23:18 -0600
        Re: value of pi and 22/7 Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-06-20 10:25 +1200
          Re: value of pi and 22/7 Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2016-06-20 12:07 +1000
            Re: value of pi and 22/7 Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 18:06 +0000
          Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 23:19 -0600
            Re: value of pi and 22/7 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-06-20 16:22 +1000
              Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 10:01 -0600
                Re: value of pi and 22/7 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2016-06-21 18:38 +1000
              Re: value of pi and 22/7 Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 10:09 -0600
          Re: value of pi and 22/7 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 22:51 -0700
            Re: value of pi and 22/7 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-06-20 10:32 +0300
              Re: value of pi and 22/7 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 01:01 -0700
                Re: value of pi and 22/7 Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com> - 2016-06-20 17:24 -0500
                Re: value of pi and 22/7 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-06-21 01:47 +0300
                Re: value of pi and 22/7 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrencedo99@gmail.com> - 2016-06-22 14:20 -0700
      Re: value of pi and 22/7 Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-06-20 10:14 +1200
        Re: value of pi and 22/7 Grant Edwards <grant.b.edwards@gmail.com> - 2016-06-20 17:53 +0000
        Re: value of pi and 22/7 Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2016-06-20 21:52 +0300
          Re: value of pi and 22/7 Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2016-06-22 00:52 +1200
  Re: value of pi and 22/7 Pete Forman <petef4+usenet@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 13:05 +0100
  Re: value of pi and 22/7 Johannes Bauer <dfnsonfsduifb@gmx.de> - 2016-06-18 18:09 +0200

csiph-web