@Sh33un If it were true that we create the value of pi by calculating it, then it would also be true that we create the value of 4 by computing it whenever we add 2+2. Pi is just as fixed as 4 is. This seems to be a very strange usage of the word "create". Also note that pi is a feature of Euclidean geometry, which doesn't necessarily match up with reality. Even if you could change to another reality or universe, pi would still be the same value because Euclidean geometry would be the same.
PI is not proof of intelligence, or proof of anything. It is also not DISproof of anything. It is a ratio of a perfect circle's circumference to its diameter. Within a base 10 system, there is only one value it CAN have. If we used base 13, Pi would have a different value, but the ratio would not change. It is a function of Geometry, and Geometry, ultimately, is a function of reality. Within our universe, there is only one value Pi can have.
If scientist could get away with saying a sky pixie did it for all our problems, my job would be so much easier. But since I'm an actual scientist I couldn't let that fly and need to chase the evidence where it goes and keep plugging away till I figure it out. Damn actual science is much more difficult that bs, but at least you can rely on actual science.
@YodaLN Yeah I vaguely remember deriving that formula in high school. But I'm not talking about 3 degree space, I'm talking about 11 or 21 dimensions. Anyone who's looked into it knows that these dimensions are very small and twisted up tightly upon themselves. My idea (which I've already stated was just a glancing thought) is that the presence of those dimensions could be responsible for pulling PI from a rational number into an irrational one. I'm not interested in taking it any further.
When used as a symbol for the mathematical constant, the Greek letter (π) is not capitalized at the beginning of a sentence. The capital letter Π (Pi) has a completely different mathematical meaning; it is used for expressing the product of a sequence. <3 wiki
I've been watching youtube AE for a while, and just now noticed the people who post these vids, for the most part, tend not to cut up the vid to edit boring bits. That's a good thing in my opinion, so certain deluded people can't point fingers about favoritism on the air.
@bttrflykiss7701 I tend to get upset with people who treat you as "stupid" because you have different experiences as them. (Jeff Dee) I've done a lot of research into ghosts, and other "para-normal" activity.While it has yet to be demonstrated in a lab, I'll go to my grave believing in what I've seen, heard and felt. Though I do try not to extrapolate beyond my actual experiences.
@seeqer66 How do you know that what you saw, heard or felt is paranormal?
Whenever someone tells me they've seen something paranormal, they always say it so calmly, like it's no big deal.
Trust me, if I heard a voice or saw an apparition when I knew no one else is around, I'd check myself into a hospital. That event would change my life forever. It wouldn't just be some small detail to casually mention in a conversation, I'd be a completely different person.
@seeqer66 Why is it that someone like you can see paranormal activity every day, but other people go their entire lives without seeing it? I've been to supposedly haunted places and I didn't see anything.
I guess the difference is if I hear something, I don't automatically say "OMG a ghost there ghost right there ghost he ghostily ghosted a ghosting ghoster ghost"
And I don't automatically do that if I see something. What I see could be anything. A dot of light is not necessarily a ghost.
@ninjajesus81 It's a matter of opening the mind properly. My imagination (fortunately) developed before my love of logic. I got involved with practicing "magic". If you go into it with a certain mindset, it becomes invisible. If you go into it with another mindset, it's as obvious as everything else around you. Try meditation to open your mind if you're interested. You can do this, then close it again and analyze the results.
@seeqer66 If something is there, you can see it regardless of your mindset. If something is not there, you won't see anything, but you MAY see something if you use your imagination or you're hallucinating.
Why would your mind have to be open to see a ghost? If the ghost is there, you should be able to see it regardless. No matter how much I try to open my mind, I'll never see a ghost and people like you will just explain to me that my mind isn't truly open.
@ninjajesus81 I have some hypotheses regarding this. I'm even working on an experiment that has the potential to show evidence of the existence of "magic". If you simply use logic and don't try to open your mind, you'll never see what I've seen. If you're willing to open your mind, and do some experimentation on your own, you may be surprised by what you find. I have practiced magic for almost 35 years. It's been proven to me over and over again. BTW, I've never received a dime for my work.
@seeqer66 In the history of the world, no one has ever proven anything paranormal to exist. If you did, you would be the first. Doesn't that tell you something?
@ninjajesus81 Yes it does. Just not the same thing it tells you. Look, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. If you're interested, check into it. Magic is results based, not faith based. If not, so be it. I was just saying that just because you don't have a reason to believe, does not mean that others don't. Believe whatever you choose, whether based on logic or personal experience. Only, try not to be rude, just because we have different experiences.
@seeqer66 It's not a matter of our different experiences, I just think you're misinterpreting your experiences, or you could just be flat out lying. If magic existed, we'd know about it by now. People have been talking about it for long enough, yet there isn't a shred of proof for it. Some people claim they can do magic, but apparently only when no one is looking. In that case, I can turn into a floating ball of fire, but if someone looks, I turn back into a normal human being.
@ninjajesus81 It's funny you say that. You obviously don't understand the concepts of magic. However, the experiment I was talking about takes into account that observation appears to affect magic directly. I've seen thousands of spells cast. Large groups of people can raise and direct absolutely HUGE amounts of Manna. However, I've never seen such a spell have a direct effect on reality. Meanwhile, I've had great success, with my own spell-work, when I've been alone and haven't reported my work
@seeqer66 So you have seen large groups of people direct huge amounts of mana? What does that mean? How would you go about proving that happened if you wanted to?
@ninjajesus81 As I've said, I'm not interested in trying to prove this to you right now. Though, I'm working on it. Yes, I've seen it many times. Manna is the "energy" that's drawn up and directed in the use of magic. With someone who is willing to open their minds, I can usually teach them to see it within about ten minutes. I'm not sure how manna could be detected independently. My experiment is based on the results.
@seeqer66 I meant proving it to anyone. Once you figure out how to prove it, talk to James Randi and collect your million dollars. It's hard for people like me to believe in stuff that can't just be shown to me, but I have to be in a specific state of mind to see it.
My mind is open to ghosts, aliens and anything, but I've failed to see it my entire life, which leads me to believe none of those things exist.
@ninjajesus81 If I release the findings before my death, I'll definitely go that rout. If you're honestly interested, then I recommend personal experimentation. I've never met anyone who's made some real effort in that way without conceding that "something" is there.
You realize that prayer groups make the same claims as you're making with "magick", and that in double-blind controlled situations, the outcome has always been within the range of random chance, right?
@mtszabo I do. In fact, I've gone to Charismatic churches specifically to watch the unique manna flow. It's similar to other ecstatic religions. Very powerful, very little focus. Again, observation seems to be the problem. The more it's observed, the less effective it's going to be. This is not common knowledge among magicians. It's a hypothesis, I've come up with on my own to explain why it's so difficult to prove.
@mtszabo As weird as that sounds, yes. The manna can be observed obviously, but the results can't be. In fact, it IS common knowledge within magical circles that the best way to get a spell to work, is to cast it, then put it out of your mind. Thus limiting even your own observation.
Well, the skeptic in me thinks that you probably have about the same success rate as when I pray to my pet rock; but, heck, I don't claim to know everything so more power to you.
@mtszabo If you simply took my word for what I say, without personal experience to back it up, I would have absolutely no respect for you. Skepticism is a good thing. I've enjoyed our conversation. Good luck on your journey.
The funny thing about Pi is that it does not exist.
Pi is defined as the relation between two mathematical concepts. Diameter and circumference of a circle. These concepts has not been discovered but has been invented. Heck even the circle is invented.
There's nothing improbable about Pi being exactly what it is, any more than it's amazing that 2 is exactly equal to 2. But more to the point, Pi is not a parameter of the real-world universe we inhabit. Pi is a feature of the abstract world of mathematics, which only partially corresponds to the real world.
@sbunny8 exactly. I work with the limits of Mathematics and I keep seeing things such as Pi and so on being used as weird implications of transcendental b.s. lol. There is lots of neat properties of Pi but, Pi is in the same exact class of uncomputable numbers as most of the real numbers. Nothing super special about that since most numbers are impossible to represent on any machine.
@Entertainmentwf The circumference of a circle has to be greater than the perimeter of an inscribed polygon and less than the perimeter of a circumscribed polygon. The value of pi is entirely determined by polygons. It's not a random number at all. And it certainly doesn't prove anything about whether our universe was created purposely or randomly because pi isn't a feature of our universe. Pi is a logical consequence of Euclidean Geometry.
@sbunny8 ... where the heck have you been. I haven't even stated anything involving the universe...... LOL, you are talking like I don't even know what you are describing. I'm a theoretical computer scientist who works with what you are describing on a very daily basis..... LOL
Pi is something you cannot truly obtain. It's impossible. You will only obtain n digits of PI. Turing Machines proof in basic sense...
@Entertainmentwf May I add.. There are randomized methods to obtain the same precision of PI... clearly you have much to learn about the computability of numbers and random numbers ;).
@Entertainmentwf FYI, I have a master's degree in theoretical mathematics. I stand by what I said: pi is not a random number. I thought the person speaking in the video implied that the creator of our universe might have manipulated the value of pi (a theme which was discussed in Carl Sagan's book Contact) but I maintain that changing the value of pi is just as impossible as trying to make 3 smaller than 2. I never said pi was computable. I said its value is fixed and unchangeable.
@sbunny8 I guess referring to the numerous randomization techniques mastered by Kolmogorov to approximate PI since it's impossible to actually attain PI itself as a literal numeric value. We only use the symbol PI to represent the expression (which is one of many interpretations of PI by the way).
Refer to randomization algorithms for PI. I'm a theoretical computer scientist btw ;). You really dont seem to know much about PI then... Since Turing used it many many times in this fashion.
@sbunny8 To be more precise: It is impossible to construct a geometry in which the ratio R between the circumference and the diameter of a circle is the same for all circles AND this ratio is different from Pi. In non-Euclidean geometry it is possible for circles to have R different from Pi, but in that case R is different for different circles.
E.g., on the surface of a sphere, R is smaller than Pi for all circles but big circles have smaller R than small ones.
@sbunny8 " I have a master's degree in theoretical mathematics. I stand by what I said: pi is not a random number"
I agree of course. Mine's in physics. Since PI comes from a 2 dimensional geometrical concept (the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference) I wonder if something will fall out of String Theory once it's worked out and that in 11 dimensions PI turns into a rational number in light of the new theory. Not a very developed thought, just occurred to me. PI is certainly weird.
No, you are a moron. Pi is a concept used to describe 2-dimensional geometrical concept. If we were in a thousand dimensions Pi would stay the same BECAUSE IT'S USED TO DESCRIBE A 2-DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRICAL CONCEPT. Fuck, why do you think invoking more definitions is going to change Pi? We are in 3 dimensions, Pi is still the same. When/if m-theory is validated 100%, PI WILL STILL BE PI. Fuck.
It's funny to, because there is a fuck ton of numbers with no end.
@JamesCizuz Thanks for the thoughtful reply. You're a fucking asshole! Ideas like mine sometimes lead to radical discoveries. Who would have thought energy and matter were the same thing. Now go fuck yourself!
@JamesCizuz You started it. You didn't show my argument is flawed you just insulted me.
Here's a more developed version. 200 years ago everyone was convinced that Newton was correct because measurements confirmed it. But as Einstein pointed out he was only approximately correct and only at "slow" speeds. You can say well we don't live in light speed conditions but the Lorentzian correction still applies even if it makes almost no difference.
@JamesCizuz What if our 3 dimensional world is slightly affected by the other 8 dimensions. String theory shows these dimensions are microscopic but what if they "nudge" PI's value to 3.1416000000000?
Closing your mind to new ideas won't get you anywhere. This idea probably IS flawed but who knows? I don't need comments like yours putting out innovative thinking. I don't mind if it's wrong just putting it out there. A lot of the other irrational numbers could be similarly affected, who knows?
@warren52nz "Ideas like mine sometimes lead to radical discoveries. Who would have thought energy and matter were the same thing."
I think you've failed to understand a fairly fundamental difference between mathematics and physics. PI is a concept that follows directly from logic. There is no observation of reality that could ever change it - with the exception of experimentally falsifying the laws of logic. Which would undermine mathematics in its entirety, not just PI.
@warren52nz What you are suggesting is actually not changing PI. It's demonstrating that Cartesian coordinate systems are a bad model for our reality. That's within the realm of physics, not mathematics, and to be honest I was under the impression that minor deviations from the Cartesian model have already been demonstrated. If that's true, then PI might have less physical relevance than some other number or function, but that's something else entirely.
Is a third a different because it repeats indefinitely? No, it repeats indefinitely because of our FLAWED base-10 counting system. We use 10 states to express a number, 0-9. Binary uses 2 states 0 and 1. And Trinary will fit thirds perfectly because it has 3 states.
Pi is 3.14 because that is it's base-10 representation.
I get that. Newtonian physics is correct at V=0 but so what? That's not very useful in the real world. 2 dimensions is a mathematical concept so Pi=3.1415926.... (I know it to 200 decimal places) in a 2 dimensional world but we don't LIVE in a 2 dimensional world.
So just as Newton is right when V=0, PI is right in 2 dimensions but neither outcome is perfectly useful.
@sbunny8 I object to your last statement. How do we know the value of pi? We compute it! We create the value, essentially; not discover it. Why? Because the value of pi isn't written down somewhere in a hidden dimension of reality.
@sbunny8 pi is definitely a fixed number. it is simply the circumference of a cirlce divided by its diameter. it can be expresses as a frection, but not as a base 10 decimal. therfore it's exact value is only approximated. but it is still a fixed number. you are right.
But not as a fraction of two whole numbers. It's CIrcumference/Diameter, but one, or both of those 2 must always be a non-repeating decimal number. It's not a fraction.
A number being irrational or transcendental doesn't mean it contains all possible sequences of digits. The first number to be proved transcendental was the Liouville constant and it contains only digits 1 and 0 in its decimal expansion. Thus it cannot contain any sequences involving 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and in fact never has two 1s together except the first two.
I think that at [2:51] he meant that you eventually move ON from hypothesis to theory, arriving at a model to USE.
But yes, if you're saying that the model might one day be replaced or refined as science learns something radically new (e.g. Einstein's relativity replacing Newtonian physics in some cases), I agree. In that sense science is never "done". But you DO have to publish your conclusions at some point!
Although, not all information will appear in pi because it contains no repetiton, I compare it to a pattern of no patterns.
...3776... exists no where in pi because pi (being based on a ratio) would infinitely repeat 7s after it repeated once, and no longer be infinite. Does anyone know where mathematicians got the nessesary perfect information nessesary to calculate pi, as an electron microscope couldn't even come close to the accuracy nessesary for calculating pi.
Pi doesn't have a repeating decimal representation, but that doesn't mean there aren't ANY repetitions of single digits or even long patterns (e.g. 123123123). There are many, otherwise it couldn't have an infinite non-repeating decimal representation. With just 10 digits, not allowing a digit to repeat, you quickly run out of new patterns.
As an example: the digit '3' repeats after only 24 digits: 3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433... <---
I'm not quite sure what electron microscopes and "perfect information" have to do with it. Pi has certain properties, a number of equalities involving Pi have been found and proven, many of which can be used to approximate it to any precision you like.
There even are algorithms to calculate the n-th digit (in some system) without looking at all the others.
there is repetition in individual digits like ...42555834..., but there isn't permanent repetition as you would find if you divide 11 by 7, and yes i did look it up a while ago, they find pi using sequences that grow longer for every level of precision.
for a computer to actually find pi exactly it would indeed take infinite space, but using certain patterns like the Gregory-Liebniz series, it can be calculated to various degrees of accuracy, increasing per repetition.
@FitnessExpert Now did you know that Chuck Norris was the man who developed E=mc2? Just that when Einstein went public, Chuck Norris roundhouse kicked him in the face. We now know Albert Einstein as Stephen Hawking.
@Stitchman3875 I know the last digit of pi too...or more precisely, I know the fact that there is no last digit of pi, therefore, I know it doesn't exist.
@technopagan724 Excuse me? Did you not read my comment? Chuck Norris does know the last number in Pi. Thus there is a last number in Pi because Chuck Norris knows it. Do you understand? I don't want to have to repeat that.
@Stitchman3875 If you don't want to repeat it then don't, it's not a question of having to repeat it. No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to repeat your comments. And BTW, I appreciate Chuck Norris jokes as much as the next guy, but you are taking it way too seriously. I suggest you take a chill pill.
@technopagan724 Not taking it too seriously. I'm just playing along with you bro. The Chuck Norris Joke was exactly taken for what it was, a joke. I thought you were just playing along. My bad.
@Stitchman3875 If you don't want to repeat it then don't, it's not a question of having to repeat it. No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to repeat your comments. And BTW, I appreciate Chuck Norris jokes as much as the next guy, but you are taking it way too seriously. I suggest you take a chill pill.
No, you're just not comprehending the sense that I'm making. No, gravity isn't just an idea in my head. It's real and if you don't believe in it it will still kill you!!!
Yes, but reality has no god in it. Zero evidence for god and every scientific law that has been proven proves that god can't exist for god would have to violate all the laws of nature to exist.
Also if your invisible friend isn't matter or energy then by definition it doesn't exist!!!
If you don't believe in god it won't kill you. Some god-smacked-nut-jobs might kill you but nothing named god nor your invisible friends will kill you....
Gravity though is a true nasty piece of work with all those places you gotta watch out for, tall buildings, side walk corners, trees, planes falling on top of you... all very real...
compared to gravity the idea of god is truly pathetic.
So enjoy your idea of god drug trips for that is all that god is, a fun brain fart.
Of course the "idea of god" is just that, an idea in YOUR BRAIN!!! That's all that is real about it. So you god believers are all just in love with your own brain and an idea it has. When your brain likes something it generates addictive chemicals like cocaine and other fun stuff. The brain is an actual pharmacy!!!
So yes you are right your "idea of god" can't be disproven since it's just an idea in your head.
An idea is just that, a bunch of neurons firing in your brain.
It makes no sense for an idea that is just in your brain to be proven or disproven, it just is an idea your brain is having and if you feel really good about the idea it's an idea your brain is having on drugs!!! So really god is the best drug trip ever since so many people are addicted to their brain chemicals.
An actual god in existence would violate so many laws of nature that it's not funny. The speed of light prevents any gods from being omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. So yes, god is disproven by e=mc2 and general and special relativity. QED.
That would be nice. Instead of religious people creating false beliefs,wars, and so on based on a little black book, have them try to find the last number of pie, err I mean Pi.
That, or we'd just replace religion with a new pi based religion where we all recite psalms that have been found in the ascii code interpretation of pi.
Then instead of eating the jesus cracker, you have a slice of cake.
You can find more details here: "Infinite Monkeys on Infinite Keyboards Fueled by Yummy Infinite Pi" over at "paths to knowledge" period "net" - search with the googler since the youtuber won't allow urls in these comments.
This Fermilab experiment demonstrates the use of science to PROVE that something cant be via the use of EXCLUSION FROM POSSIBILITY in OBJECTIVE REALITY.
So many atheists - including Dawkins - are incorrect in their logic when they falsely assert that science cant disprove anything. It does disprove things all the time with the principle of exclusion! Logic must be connected to objective reality to be viable.
"The territory where the Higgs boson may be found continues to shrink. The latest analysis of data from the CDF and DZero collider experiments at the U.S. DOE's Fermilab now excludes a significant fraction of the allowed Higgs mass range established by earlier measurements. Now the CDF and DZero results carve out a section in the middle of this range and establish that it cannot have a mass in between 160 and 170 GeV/c2.
Yes, science can prove there is no god, and in fact has done so. Follow the evidence. e=mc^2 means that nothing (especially information) can travel faster than the speed of light, which means that gods can't be omnipresent, omnipotent, nor omniscient since those properties would require faster than light travel for the disparate parts of an invisible being to communicate. Thus there is no god. This proof is provide by science.
This is as true as saying that Newton proves that a human being can't fly or jump to the Earth's moon without the aid of a spaceship.
Science not just proves facts it can equally disprove things that just can't possibly be DUE to the very Nature of Nature. Newton, Einstein and others have uncovered hard laws of Nature that PROVE aspects of Nature and at the same time these laws disprove anything that contradicts these laws. This hold true for every hard law of Nature.
Most of Pi is a mathematical issue. You could measure the circumference of the universe down to a planck's length with a few dozen decimal places of Pi.
On a side note, he looks like he would play a great madman, an evil person. Especially when hes trying to smile so much at the beginning. Like an evil grin.
I say we need people like him as much as nice guys. Each person goes for a different audience.
I connect more with him and Matt then I do Russel.
I don't think that pi numbers in ASCII would necessarily sooner or later write Hamlet. Where is the mathematical proof of that? Pi isn't random. It is contingent upon something else, and so there could be longer finite sequences that has 0 probability in the system, no matter that the structure is infinite. If all but two sequenses of 40.000 numbers in a row would show up ever in pi, it would still appear random to us.
Its for people who say something complex has to come from something intelligent. It shows that something incredibly complex CAN arise without a creator.
Oh Christ, anyone who's seen the film 'π', should realise very quickly that the protagonist is not, repeat NOT a role model, and whose example and general outlook on life is not meant to be followed - at - all.
Talking about pi, isn't it marvelous that God made it exactly the ratio between circumference and half the diameter?
If pi would be, say, 42, then our bicycles would immediately stop working (gasp!) and the sun would extinguish because the fire would go out from the oversized cooling down surface.
my mom made pi and it was delish!Is my mom god then? Why did god only created 2 people?Adam had to fuck his own doughters to get the population growing. God is a sick perverted fuck.
Well, obviously 4000 years is a bit short, but it is interesting to consider that humanity was down to circa 1k individuals some 75k years ago from memory.
I love the story: funny-looking, awkwardly walking chimp dwindles down to a mere 1k globally and seems certain for extinction before, for reasons unknown (to me) suddenly picking itself up by the bootstraps and conquering the fucking world in so short a time that the world's head is still spinning.
God didn't make pie - the Tooth Fairy made pie in order to harvest our teeth sooner.
With an infinitely accurate measuring device the length of my penis measured in fractions of 1 ft. contains the code for everything in existence and everything that ever will be in existence.
Note that transcendental numbers like Pi (or e) would have infinite digits, without repetition, in any integer base; i.e. this is not peculiar to base 10.
Also, it's not obvious that "every possible piece of information" would be in pi. Perhaps, "every finite string" or something like that. So, for example, it's likely we could find the ascii for sqrt(2), but not likely that we would find all the digits of sqrt(2) in sequence.
You would likely be able to find them in sequence depending on what pattern you're going by (every 20th digit counts, or every 17th, etc.). You may not be able to find them for every possible counting pattern, but you'd probably be able to find a counting pattern that would find them in sequence.
I don't hear people mention the "if god exists, scientists would be studying how that god interacts with the natural world" argument NEARLY enough.
It's the part theists don't seem to understand about my position when I argue with them; they tend to try and claim that science can't investigate god, and I keep pointing out the places where their holy books describe god interacting with the natural world...
It's frustrating, especially since few atheists make this argument back at theists.
I am so fed up with arguing with theists now. At the end of the day, I believe no God exists, we are all just conclusions of science and particles, and theists talk shit. Atheism is so much better than religion. You can do anything in life you want, and tbh, death doesnt scare me, you dont feel it, so why should it bother you.
Lethal injection, for one, but you're missing the point. My point is, when you are "dying", you are not dead are you? So all you are experiencing is pain, not death. I am afraid of burning my hand on the kettle, for example, but I'm not going to die from it!
Watch the "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" episode on execution; lethal injection is NOT painless.
Anyway, that's exactly my point: I'm not afraid of BEING dead, just how I end up that way. I'll be alive long enough to feel the pain before I go, and I'd really rather forgo that privilege, yanno?
"Anyway, that's exactly my point: I'm not afraid of BEING dead, just how I end up that way. I'll be alive long enough to feel the pain before I go, and I'd really rather forgo that privilege, yanno?"
That's why I'm actually in favor of suicide, because barring some accident, I'll be able to choose the way that I go out (painless asphyxiation by carbon monoxide). Poor theists don't have the luxury of deciding when and how they die.
@Sh33un If it were true that we create the value of pi by calculating it, then it would also be true that we create the value of 4 by computing it whenever we add 2+2. Pi is just as fixed as 4 is. This seems to be a very strange usage of the word "create". Also note that pi is a feature of Euclidean geometry, which doesn't necessarily match up with reality. Even if you could change to another reality or universe, pi would still be the same value because Euclidean geometry would be the same.
sbunny8 4 months ago
I don't think this is necessarily true... just because it has infinite digits doesn't mean it contains every possible string of digits.
IoEstasCedonta 5 months ago
@IoEstasCedonta if it is random in the correct sense it should contain every possible string of digits
rgrannell1 4 months ago
@rgrannell1 It isn't.
IoEstasCedonta 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@YodaLN "You got your degree in physics from christian tech?"
LOL, no I got it from a proper University. You shouldn't be so quick to laugh off ideas from outside the square.
Remember they laughed at Henry Binkle. Come to think of it they're still laughing. 8^)
warren52nz 5 months ago
I know the last digit of pi, god told me, it´s 7
yatter1 6 months ago 2
@yatter1 Are you sure he understood you correctly? Maybe he thought you asked for the last digit of Graham's number.
TaiFerret 5 months ago
@TaiFerret i am seriously impressed that you know the last digit of graham´s number
yatter1 5 months ago
Respond to this video... I wasn´t being facetious either, I meant it
yatter1 5 months ago
@TaiFerret That´s ok, I´m just impressed that someone would know that the last digit is 7
yatter1 5 months ago
PI is not proof of intelligence, or proof of anything. It is also not DISproof of anything. It is a ratio of a perfect circle's circumference to its diameter. Within a base 10 system, there is only one value it CAN have. If we used base 13, Pi would have a different value, but the ratio would not change. It is a function of Geometry, and Geometry, ultimately, is a function of reality. Within our universe, there is only one value Pi can have.
Dethblight 6 months ago
If scientist could get away with saying a sky pixie did it for all our problems, my job would be so much easier. But since I'm an actual scientist I couldn't let that fly and need to chase the evidence where it goes and keep plugging away till I figure it out. Damn actual science is much more difficult that bs, but at least you can rely on actual science.
vnorthru 7 months ago
@YodaLN Yeah I vaguely remember deriving that formula in high school. But I'm not talking about 3 degree space, I'm talking about 11 or 21 dimensions. Anyone who's looked into it knows that these dimensions are very small and twisted up tightly upon themselves. My idea (which I've already stated was just a glancing thought) is that the presence of those dimensions could be responsible for pulling PI from a rational number into an irrational one. I'm not interested in taking it any further.
warren52nz 8 months ago
The probability that PI will have those exact digits is 100%. There is no more then 0% chance that it could be any other way.
id1337x 8 months ago
Chrsitians disliking a video: Cause if you dislike it somehow it will no longer make sense.
Judicial78 9 months ago
@YodaLN You don't get my point do you? Never mind you might one day. I already have my degree in Physics.
warren52nz 9 months ago
When used as a symbol for the mathematical constant, the Greek letter (π) is not capitalized at the beginning of a sentence. The capital letter Π (Pi) has a completely different mathematical meaning; it is used for expressing the product of a sequence. <3 wiki
VarykGerai 9 months ago
Caller is wrong. There are infinitely many strings of information that are missing from PI.
funkynosejob 11 months ago
Today I am Pi-sexual!
estarmes 1 year ago
P1 =3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209 74944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844609550582231725359408128481117450284102701938521105559644622948954930381964428810975665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326648213393607260249141273724587006606315588174881520920962829254091715364367892590360011330530548820466521384146951941511609433057270365759591953092186117381932611793105118548074462379962749 56735188575...........
witch26071 1 year ago 12
A message to engineers: pi is not equal to 22/7 !!!
mastersausagemaker 1 year ago
What a conclusion:"Someday this week was friday." I wonder if he's a mathematician(<3)
MeetYourMeaker 1 year ago
@MeetYourMeaker he said "someday this week was Pi-day (3/14)"
eclipse278 1 year ago
I've been watching youtube AE for a while, and just now noticed the people who post these vids, for the most part, tend not to cut up the vid to edit boring bits. That's a good thing in my opinion, so certain deluded people can't point fingers about favoritism on the air.
drche420 1 year ago
What is the name of the song at the beginning and end of this video? Can someone tell me?
gspendlove 1 year ago 2
@gspendlove Stop the video at 0:09
TheAtheistExperience 1 year ago 12
@TheAtheistExperience Sorry, I'm kind of a duh. Thank you.
gspendlove 1 year ago
@TheAtheistExperience hahaha nice way of answering questions with a question, makes them think.. sad to say people does not want to think anymore
valsotto27 1 year ago
jeff blew my mind man
equallyeasilyfuqyou 1 year ago
A non-repreating number does not say this at all. Look up Cantor.
funkynosejob 1 year ago
"Believing in ghosts, is stupid", unless of course you've seen them.
"Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes"?
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 wtf?
bttrflykiss7701 1 year ago
@bttrflykiss7701 I tend to get upset with people who treat you as "stupid" because you have different experiences as them. (Jeff Dee) I've done a lot of research into ghosts, and other "para-normal" activity.While it has yet to be demonstrated in a lab, I'll go to my grave believing in what I've seen, heard and felt. Though I do try not to extrapolate beyond my actual experiences.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 How do you know that what you saw, heard or felt is paranormal?
Whenever someone tells me they've seen something paranormal, they always say it so calmly, like it's no big deal.
Trust me, if I heard a voice or saw an apparition when I knew no one else is around, I'd check myself into a hospital. That event would change my life forever. It wouldn't just be some small detail to casually mention in a conversation, I'd be a completely different person.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 That would be because of years of repeated experiences. I've been at this for almost 35 years.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 Why is it that someone like you can see paranormal activity every day, but other people go their entire lives without seeing it? I've been to supposedly haunted places and I didn't see anything.
I guess the difference is if I hear something, I don't automatically say "OMG a ghost there ghost right there ghost he ghostily ghosted a ghosting ghoster ghost"
And I don't automatically do that if I see something. What I see could be anything. A dot of light is not necessarily a ghost.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 It's a matter of opening the mind properly. My imagination (fortunately) developed before my love of logic. I got involved with practicing "magic". If you go into it with a certain mindset, it becomes invisible. If you go into it with another mindset, it's as obvious as everything else around you. Try meditation to open your mind if you're interested. You can do this, then close it again and analyze the results.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 If something is there, you can see it regardless of your mindset. If something is not there, you won't see anything, but you MAY see something if you use your imagination or you're hallucinating.
Why would your mind have to be open to see a ghost? If the ghost is there, you should be able to see it regardless. No matter how much I try to open my mind, I'll never see a ghost and people like you will just explain to me that my mind isn't truly open.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 I have some hypotheses regarding this. I'm even working on an experiment that has the potential to show evidence of the existence of "magic". If you simply use logic and don't try to open your mind, you'll never see what I've seen. If you're willing to open your mind, and do some experimentation on your own, you may be surprised by what you find. I have practiced magic for almost 35 years. It's been proven to me over and over again. BTW, I've never received a dime for my work.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 In the history of the world, no one has ever proven anything paranormal to exist. If you did, you would be the first. Doesn't that tell you something?
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 Yes it does. Just not the same thing it tells you. Look, I'm not trying to convince you of anything. If you're interested, check into it. Magic is results based, not faith based. If not, so be it. I was just saying that just because you don't have a reason to believe, does not mean that others don't. Believe whatever you choose, whether based on logic or personal experience. Only, try not to be rude, just because we have different experiences.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 It's not a matter of our different experiences, I just think you're misinterpreting your experiences, or you could just be flat out lying. If magic existed, we'd know about it by now. People have been talking about it for long enough, yet there isn't a shred of proof for it. Some people claim they can do magic, but apparently only when no one is looking. In that case, I can turn into a floating ball of fire, but if someone looks, I turn back into a normal human being.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 It's funny you say that. You obviously don't understand the concepts of magic. However, the experiment I was talking about takes into account that observation appears to affect magic directly. I've seen thousands of spells cast. Large groups of people can raise and direct absolutely HUGE amounts of Manna. However, I've never seen such a spell have a direct effect on reality. Meanwhile, I've had great success, with my own spell-work, when I've been alone and haven't reported my work
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 So you have seen large groups of people direct huge amounts of mana? What does that mean? How would you go about proving that happened if you wanted to?
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 As I've said, I'm not interested in trying to prove this to you right now. Though, I'm working on it. Yes, I've seen it many times. Manna is the "energy" that's drawn up and directed in the use of magic. With someone who is willing to open their minds, I can usually teach them to see it within about ten minutes. I'm not sure how manna could be detected independently. My experiment is based on the results.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66 I meant proving it to anyone. Once you figure out how to prove it, talk to James Randi and collect your million dollars. It's hard for people like me to believe in stuff that can't just be shown to me, but I have to be in a specific state of mind to see it.
My mind is open to ghosts, aliens and anything, but I've failed to see it my entire life, which leads me to believe none of those things exist.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 If I release the findings before my death, I'll definitely go that rout. If you're honestly interested, then I recommend personal experimentation. I've never met anyone who's made some real effort in that way without conceding that "something" is there.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66
You realize that prayer groups make the same claims as you're making with "magick", and that in double-blind controlled situations, the outcome has always been within the range of random chance, right?
mtszabo 1 year ago
@mtszabo I do. In fact, I've gone to Charismatic churches specifically to watch the unique manna flow. It's similar to other ecstatic religions. Very powerful, very little focus. Again, observation seems to be the problem. The more it's observed, the less effective it's going to be. This is not common knowledge among magicians. It's a hypothesis, I've come up with on my own to explain why it's so difficult to prove.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66
So in other words, the magick only works when no one else is watching?
mtszabo 1 year ago
@mtszabo As weird as that sounds, yes. The manna can be observed obviously, but the results can't be. In fact, it IS common knowledge within magical circles that the best way to get a spell to work, is to cast it, then put it out of your mind. Thus limiting even your own observation.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@seeqer66
Well, the skeptic in me thinks that you probably have about the same success rate as when I pray to my pet rock; but, heck, I don't claim to know everything so more power to you.
mtszabo 1 year ago
@mtszabo If you simply took my word for what I say, without personal experience to back it up, I would have absolutely no respect for you. Skepticism is a good thing. I've enjoyed our conversation. Good luck on your journey.
seeqer66 1 year ago
@ninjajesus81 And yes, I've changed a lot over those years.
seeqer66 1 year ago
The funny thing about Pi is that it does not exist.
Pi is defined as the relation between two mathematical concepts. Diameter and circumference of a circle. These concepts has not been discovered but has been invented. Heck even the circle is invented.
hasseklas56 1 year ago
"Believing in ghosts is STUPID!"
Easily the best Jeff quote of the week. :)
1RadicalOne 1 year ago
Getting hungry from all this math talk.
Think I'll order a piece of Pi
tdjdk 1 year ago
There's nothing improbable about Pi being exactly what it is, any more than it's amazing that 2 is exactly equal to 2. But more to the point, Pi is not a parameter of the real-world universe we inhabit. Pi is a feature of the abstract world of mathematics, which only partially corresponds to the real world.
sbunny8 1 year ago 2
@sbunny8 exactly. I work with the limits of Mathematics and I keep seeing things such as Pi and so on being used as weird implications of transcendental b.s. lol. There is lots of neat properties of Pi but, Pi is in the same exact class of uncomputable numbers as most of the real numbers. Nothing super special about that since most numbers are impossible to represent on any machine.
Entertainmentwf 1 year ago
@Entertainmentwf The circumference of a circle has to be greater than the perimeter of an inscribed polygon and less than the perimeter of a circumscribed polygon. The value of pi is entirely determined by polygons. It's not a random number at all. And it certainly doesn't prove anything about whether our universe was created purposely or randomly because pi isn't a feature of our universe. Pi is a logical consequence of Euclidean Geometry.
sbunny8 1 year ago 3
@sbunny8 ... where the heck have you been. I haven't even stated anything involving the universe...... LOL, you are talking like I don't even know what you are describing. I'm a theoretical computer scientist who works with what you are describing on a very daily basis..... LOL
Pi is something you cannot truly obtain. It's impossible. You will only obtain n digits of PI. Turing Machines proof in basic sense...
Entertainmentwf 1 year ago
@Entertainmentwf May I add.. There are randomized methods to obtain the same precision of PI... clearly you have much to learn about the computability of numbers and random numbers ;).
Entertainmentwf 1 year ago
@Entertainmentwf FYI, I have a master's degree in theoretical mathematics. I stand by what I said: pi is not a random number. I thought the person speaking in the video implied that the creator of our universe might have manipulated the value of pi (a theme which was discussed in Carl Sagan's book Contact) but I maintain that changing the value of pi is just as impossible as trying to make 3 smaller than 2. I never said pi was computable. I said its value is fixed and unchangeable.
sbunny8 1 year ago 22
@sbunny8 I guess referring to the numerous randomization techniques mastered by Kolmogorov to approximate PI since it's impossible to actually attain PI itself as a literal numeric value. We only use the symbol PI to represent the expression (which is one of many interpretations of PI by the way).
Refer to randomization algorithms for PI. I'm a theoretical computer scientist btw ;). You really dont seem to know much about PI then... Since Turing used it many many times in this fashion.
Entertainmentwf 1 year ago
@sbunny8 To be more precise: It is impossible to construct a geometry in which the ratio R between the circumference and the diameter of a circle is the same for all circles AND this ratio is different from Pi. In non-Euclidean geometry it is possible for circles to have R different from Pi, but in that case R is different for different circles.
E.g., on the surface of a sphere, R is smaller than Pi for all circles but big circles have smaller R than small ones.
guyhill2 1 year ago
@sbunny8 " I have a master's degree in theoretical mathematics. I stand by what I said: pi is not a random number"
I agree of course. Mine's in physics. Since PI comes from a 2 dimensional geometrical concept (the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference) I wonder if something will fall out of String Theory once it's worked out and that in 11 dimensions PI turns into a rational number in light of the new theory. Not a very developed thought, just occurred to me. PI is certainly weird.
warren52nz 9 months ago
@warren52nz
No, you are a moron. Pi is a concept used to describe 2-dimensional geometrical concept. If we were in a thousand dimensions Pi would stay the same BECAUSE IT'S USED TO DESCRIBE A 2-DIMENSIONAL GEOMETRICAL CONCEPT. Fuck, why do you think invoking more definitions is going to change Pi? We are in 3 dimensions, Pi is still the same. When/if m-theory is validated 100%, PI WILL STILL BE PI. Fuck.
It's funny to, because there is a fuck ton of numbers with no end.
JamesCizuz 9 months ago
@JamesCizuz Thanks for the thoughtful reply. You're a fucking asshole! Ideas like mine sometimes lead to radical discoveries. Who would have thought energy and matter were the same thing. Now go fuck yourself!
warren52nz 9 months ago
@warren52nz
Wow you are insane, do you insult everyone who shows how your argument is flawed?
JamesCizuz 9 months ago
@JamesCizuz You started it. You didn't show my argument is flawed you just insulted me.
Here's a more developed version. 200 years ago everyone was convinced that Newton was correct because measurements confirmed it. But as Einstein pointed out he was only approximately correct and only at "slow" speeds. You can say well we don't live in light speed conditions but the Lorentzian correction still applies even if it makes almost no difference.
(cont)
warren52nz 9 months ago
@JamesCizuz What if our 3 dimensional world is slightly affected by the other 8 dimensions. String theory shows these dimensions are microscopic but what if they "nudge" PI's value to 3.1416000000000?
Closing your mind to new ideas won't get you anywhere. This idea probably IS flawed but who knows? I don't need comments like yours putting out innovative thinking. I don't mind if it's wrong just putting it out there. A lot of the other irrational numbers could be similarly affected, who knows?
warren52nz 9 months ago
@warren52nz "Ideas like mine sometimes lead to radical discoveries. Who would have thought energy and matter were the same thing."
I think you've failed to understand a fairly fundamental difference between mathematics and physics. PI is a concept that follows directly from logic. There is no observation of reality that could ever change it - with the exception of experimentally falsifying the laws of logic. Which would undermine mathematics in its entirety, not just PI.
Gnomefro 9 months ago
@warren52nz What you are suggesting is actually not changing PI. It's demonstrating that Cartesian coordinate systems are a bad model for our reality. That's within the realm of physics, not mathematics, and to be honest I was under the impression that minor deviations from the Cartesian model have already been demonstrated. If that's true, then PI might have less physical relevance than some other number or function, but that's something else entirely.
Gnomefro 9 months ago
@Gnomefro Yeah I think I agree with you actually. As I said in the beginning, it was just an idea. Oh well. You win.
warren52nz 9 months ago
@warren52nz
Is a third a different because it repeats indefinitely? No, it repeats indefinitely because of our FLAWED base-10 counting system. We use 10 states to express a number, 0-9. Binary uses 2 states 0 and 1. And Trinary will fit thirds perfectly because it has 3 states.
Pi is 3.14 because that is it's base-10 representation.
What do you not get about this?
JamesCizuz 9 months ago
@JamesCizuz "What do you not get about this?"
I get that. Newtonian physics is correct at V=0 but so what? That's not very useful in the real world. 2 dimensions is a mathematical concept so Pi=3.1415926.... (I know it to 200 decimal places) in a 2 dimensional world but we don't LIVE in a 2 dimensional world.
So just as Newton is right when V=0, PI is right in 2 dimensions but neither outcome is perfectly useful.
What don't you get about that?
warren52nz 9 months ago
@sbunny8 I object to your last statement. How do we know the value of pi? We compute it! We create the value, essentially; not discover it. Why? Because the value of pi isn't written down somewhere in a hidden dimension of reality.
Sh33un 4 months ago in playlist Видео от пользователя TheAtheistExperience
@sbunny8 pi is definitely a fixed number. it is simply the circumference of a cirlce divided by its diameter. it can be expresses as a frection, but not as a base 10 decimal. therfore it's exact value is only approximated. but it is still a fixed number. you are right.
brownbigb 1 year ago
@brownbigb Re: can be expressed as a fraction
But not as a fraction of two whole numbers. It's CIrcumference/Diameter, but one, or both of those 2 must always be a non-repeating decimal number. It's not a fraction.
neoaeonian 1 year ago
A number being irrational or transcendental doesn't mean it contains all possible sequences of digits. The first number to be proved transcendental was the Liouville constant and it contains only digits 1 and 0 in its decimal expansion. Thus it cannot contain any sequences involving 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 and in fact never has two 1s together except the first two.
Quaternionic 2 years ago 5
its the pi of babel
Gemmabeta 2 years ago
I didn't know that there was a Pi Day. That's my birthday (Einstein's too).
Bfdidc 2 years ago
that's the name of that song?
MemeScythe 2 years ago
@MemeScythe Darkening of the light by Concrete Blonde
newcoyote 2 years ago
thanks Newcoyote!
MemeScythe 2 years ago
Agreed, thanks for posting. Sub'd.
FSM votes 'yes' on Russel Glasser.
nixonfanatic 2 years ago
Always great vids. Thanks. Keep them coming.
lc237 2 years ago
Science is never "done" - not sure why the guy in the orange said that.
notabook 2 years ago
there is even a theorem that proves that math is never done, ask mr. gödel
Muvlonion 2 years ago
>Science is never "done" - not sure why the
>guy in the orange said that
I think that at [2:51] he meant that you eventually move ON from hypothesis to theory, arriving at a model to USE.
But yes, if you're saying that the model might one day be replaced or refined as science learns something radically new (e.g. Einstein's relativity replacing Newtonian physics in some cases), I agree. In that sense science is never "done". But you DO have to publish your conclusions at some point!
geezerbill 2 years ago
Although, not all information will appear in pi because it contains no repetiton, I compare it to a pattern of no patterns.
...3776... exists no where in pi because pi (being based on a ratio) would infinitely repeat 7s after it repeated once, and no longer be infinite. Does anyone know where mathematicians got the nessesary perfect information nessesary to calculate pi, as an electron microscope couldn't even come close to the accuracy nessesary for calculating pi.
rjswolfman 2 years ago
Pi doesn't have a repeating decimal representation, but that doesn't mean there aren't ANY repetitions of single digits or even long patterns (e.g. 123123123). There are many, otherwise it couldn't have an infinite non-repeating decimal representation. With just 10 digits, not allowing a digit to repeat, you quickly run out of new patterns.
As an example: the digit '3' repeats after only 24 digits: 3.14159 26535 89793 23846 26433... <---
thialfihar 2 years ago
I'm not quite sure what electron microscopes and "perfect information" have to do with it. Pi has certain properties, a number of equalities involving Pi have been found and proven, many of which can be used to approximate it to any precision you like.
There even are algorithms to calculate the n-th digit (in some system) without looking at all the others.
thialfihar 2 years ago
Computer... are AMAZING !
ilikor1 2 years ago
that is a lie. there is repetition in pi. look it up on the web somewhere.
i think there is a way using sequences/series to calculate pi.
elph98 2 years ago
there is repetition in individual digits like ...42555834..., but there isn't permanent repetition as you would find if you divide 11 by 7, and yes i did look it up a while ago, they find pi using sequences that grow longer for every level of precision.
rjswolfman 2 years ago
ah. a misunderstanding it seems. but no program has such a repetition in it, as that would take infinite space, which no computer has.
elph98 2 years ago
for a computer to actually find pi exactly it would indeed take infinite space, but using certain patterns like the Gregory-Liebniz series, it can be calculated to various degrees of accuracy, increasing per repetition.
rjswolfman 2 years ago
Chuck Norris knows the last digit of Pi.
Stitchman3875 2 years ago 73
@Stitchman3875 Wrong! Chuck Norris created Pi ! lol
FitnessExpert 1 year ago
@FitnessExpert Now did you know that Chuck Norris was the man who developed E=mc2? Just that when Einstein went public, Chuck Norris roundhouse kicked him in the face. We now know Albert Einstein as Stephen Hawking.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875 wrong chuck norris round housed the last number off and created rounding both up and down in mathematics.
Azurewrath232 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875 I know the last digit of pi too...or more precisely, I know the fact that there is no last digit of pi, therefore, I know it doesn't exist.
technopagan724 1 year ago
@technopagan724 Excuse me? Did you not read my comment? Chuck Norris does know the last number in Pi. Thus there is a last number in Pi because Chuck Norris knows it. Do you understand? I don't want to have to repeat that.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875 If you don't want to repeat it then don't, it's not a question of having to repeat it. No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to repeat your comments. And BTW, I appreciate Chuck Norris jokes as much as the next guy, but you are taking it way too seriously. I suggest you take a chill pill.
technopagan724 1 year ago
@technopagan724 Not taking it too seriously. I'm just playing along with you bro. The Chuck Norris Joke was exactly taken for what it was, a joke. I thought you were just playing along. My bad.
Stitchman3875 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875 Ah I see. I'm sorry, text is not the greatest outlet to convey sarcasm and other subtlties of spoken language
technopagan724 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Stitchman3875 If you don't want to repeat it then don't, it's not a question of having to repeat it. No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to repeat your comments. And BTW, I appreciate Chuck Norris jokes as much as the next guy, but you are taking it way too seriously. I suggest you take a chill pill.
technopagan724 1 year ago
@Stitchman3875
Chuck Norris also wants the bible taught in school.
JamesCizuz 9 months ago
@JamesCizuz My comment was merely a joke.
Stitchman3875 9 months ago
@Stitchman3875 plus he's counted to infinity twice
Galileo005 8 months ago
Oh, when I said "crazy math" I really do mean "crazy"!!!
MountThor 2 years ago
For a guy who says he's not going to talk Marko Rodin's 44 video lecture is a lot of talking!!!
jaguarclaw you're one deluded puppy.
Invisible friends, crazy math, what else?
MountThor 2 years ago
No, you're just not comprehending the sense that I'm making. No, gravity isn't just an idea in my head. It's real and if you don't believe in it it will still kill you!!!
Yes, but reality has no god in it. Zero evidence for god and every scientific law that has been proven proves that god can't exist for god would have to violate all the laws of nature to exist.
Also if your invisible friend isn't matter or energy then by definition it doesn't exist!!!
;-)
MountThor 2 years ago
If you don't believe in god it won't kill you. Some god-smacked-nut-jobs might kill you but nothing named god nor your invisible friends will kill you....
Gravity though is a true nasty piece of work with all those places you gotta watch out for, tall buildings, side walk corners, trees, planes falling on top of you... all very real...
compared to gravity the idea of god is truly pathetic.
So enjoy your idea of god drug trips for that is all that god is, a fun brain fart.
MountThor 2 years ago
Of course the "idea of god" is just that, an idea in YOUR BRAIN!!! That's all that is real about it. So you god believers are all just in love with your own brain and an idea it has. When your brain likes something it generates addictive chemicals like cocaine and other fun stuff. The brain is an actual pharmacy!!!
So yes you are right your "idea of god" can't be disproven since it's just an idea in your head.
An idea is just that, a bunch of neurons firing in your brain.
MountThor 2 years ago
It makes no sense for an idea that is just in your brain to be proven or disproven, it just is an idea your brain is having and if you feel really good about the idea it's an idea your brain is having on drugs!!! So really god is the best drug trip ever since so many people are addicted to their brain chemicals.
MountThor 2 years ago
An actual god in existence would violate so many laws of nature that it's not funny. The speed of light prevents any gods from being omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. So yes, god is disproven by e=mc2 and general and special relativity. QED.
MountThor 2 years ago
If homosexuality isn't natural, the being gay is SUPER natural!!!
anubis2814 2 years ago
i love you.
and these videos are pretty good.
geolab101 2 years ago
Oh yeah! This settles it.
PI owns prior art for every single patent out there, and rights for every piece of media. No more copyright takedowns on Utube!!!
47f0 2 years ago
So God is in Pi? Mmm, Pie.
That would be nice. Instead of religious people creating false beliefs,wars, and so on based on a little black book, have them try to find the last number of pie, err I mean Pi.
brownnoice 2 years ago
That, or we'd just replace religion with a new pi based religion where we all recite psalms that have been found in the ascii code interpretation of pi.
Then instead of eating the jesus cracker, you have a slice of cake.
Andrewticus04 2 years ago
And that cake would be an improvement, yes?
brownnoice 2 years ago
Absolutely, yes.
Andrewticus04 2 years ago
You can find more details here: "Infinite Monkeys on Infinite Keyboards Fueled by Yummy Infinite Pi" over at "paths to knowledge" period "net" - search with the googler since the youtuber won't allow urls in these comments.
MountThor 2 years ago
This Fermilab experiment demonstrates the use of science to PROVE that something cant be via the use of EXCLUSION FROM POSSIBILITY in OBJECTIVE REALITY.
So many atheists - including Dawkins - are incorrect in their logic when they falsely assert that science cant disprove anything. It does disprove things all the time with the principle of exclusion! Logic must be connected to objective reality to be viable.
Stand up and be corrected fellow non-believers!
MountThor 2 years ago
"The territory where the Higgs boson may be found continues to shrink. The latest analysis of data from the CDF and DZero collider experiments at the U.S. DOE's Fermilab now excludes a significant fraction of the allowed Higgs mass range established by earlier measurements. Now the CDF and DZero results carve out a section in the middle of this range and establish that it cannot have a mass in between 160 and 170 GeV/c2.
MountThor 2 years ago
Yes, science can prove there is no god, and in fact has done so. Follow the evidence. e=mc^2 means that nothing (especially information) can travel faster than the speed of light, which means that gods can't be omnipresent, omnipotent, nor omniscient since those properties would require faster than light travel for the disparate parts of an invisible being to communicate. Thus there is no god. This proof is provide by science.
MountThor 2 years ago
This is as true as saying that Newton proves that a human being can't fly or jump to the Earth's moon without the aid of a spaceship.
Science not just proves facts it can equally disprove things that just can't possibly be DUE to the very Nature of Nature. Newton, Einstein and others have uncovered hard laws of Nature that PROVE aspects of Nature and at the same time these laws disprove anything that contradicts these laws. This hold true for every hard law of Nature.
MountThor 2 years ago
Pi is just circular reasoning...
digitised 2 years ago 3
Most of Pi is a mathematical issue. You could measure the circumference of the universe down to a planck's length with a few dozen decimal places of Pi.
goneutt 2 years ago
I like Dee.
On a side note, he looks like he would play a great madman, an evil person. Especially when hes trying to smile so much at the beginning. Like an evil grin.
I say we need people like him as much as nice guys. Each person goes for a different audience.
I connect more with him and Matt then I do Russel.
waltermh111 2 years ago
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510...
unaka2012 2 years ago
I don't think that pi numbers in ASCII would necessarily sooner or later write Hamlet. Where is the mathematical proof of that? Pi isn't random. It is contingent upon something else, and so there could be longer finite sequences that has 0 probability in the system, no matter that the structure is infinite. If all but two sequenses of 40.000 numbers in a row would show up ever in pi, it would still appear random to us.
Censeo 2 years ago
The difference between supernatural and non-existing is very hard to spot.
qanazir 2 years ago
Sorry how did they get from pi (and all it's digits) to not proving god and ghosts is irrelevant.
Right in the 2nd sentence...
I... I... I don't get it. What did I miss?
daddyleon 2 years ago
Its for people who say something complex has to come from something intelligent. It shows that something incredibly complex CAN arise without a creator.
wukillalogic 2 years ago
Oh Christ, anyone who's seen the film 'π', should realise very quickly that the protagonist is not, repeat NOT a role model, and whose example and general outlook on life is not meant to be followed - at - all.
PurushaDesa 2 years ago
Talking about pi, isn't it marvelous that God made it exactly the ratio between circumference and half the diameter?
If pi would be, say, 42, then our bicycles would immediately stop working (gasp!) and the sun would extinguish because the fire would go out from the oversized cooling down surface.
I thank God every day for making pi 30/10!
(1 King 7:23)
MrFacet 2 years ago
Laugh out loud!
pookiehohn 2 years ago
my mom made pi and it was delish!Is my mom god then? Why did god only created 2 people?Adam had to fuck his own doughters to get the population growing. God is a sick perverted fuck.
frank3976 2 years ago
No filthy heathen, God thought of everytihing, so Adam & Eve also had daughters.
MrFacet 2 years ago
So...Adam and Eves sons did their daughters? Is that really better?
Whoa...incest...its a game the whole family can play
LTDcunuk 2 years ago 37
incest is best!
jmsimpson11 2 years ago
Fun for all the family!
digitised 2 years ago
Actually come to think of it, the Bible is not specifically downplaying incest. Take (not literally) for example Lot and his daughters.
The only thing I wonder about is how all the variation in humanity could arise from just 6000 years breeding, after this incestuous bunch.
MrFacet 2 years ago
Well, obviously 4000 years is a bit short, but it is interesting to consider that humanity was down to circa 1k individuals some 75k years ago from memory.
I love the story: funny-looking, awkwardly walking chimp dwindles down to a mere 1k globally and seems certain for extinction before, for reasons unknown (to me) suddenly picking itself up by the bootstraps and conquering the fucking world in so short a time that the world's head is still spinning.
kuroshashu 2 years ago
That recent? Amazing.
MrFacet 2 years ago
@LTDcunuk you know what they say, incest is wincest :D
Chaaarge 1 year ago
haha jeff in at the start of the movie...lol
sugmegpls 2 years ago
God didn't make pie - the Tooth Fairy made pie in order to harvest our teeth sooner.
With an infinitely accurate measuring device the length of my penis measured in fractions of 1 ft. contains the code for everything in existence and everything that ever will be in existence.
Praise my Holy Penis!
Afod3 2 years ago
An infinite number of christians on an infinite number of youtube channels could disprove god.
Great vid!
zombiesmasher 2 years ago
Note that transcendental numbers like Pi (or e) would have infinite digits, without repetition, in any integer base; i.e. this is not peculiar to base 10.
Also, it's not obvious that "every possible piece of information" would be in pi. Perhaps, "every finite string" or something like that. So, for example, it's likely we could find the ascii for sqrt(2), but not likely that we would find all the digits of sqrt(2) in sequence.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
You would likely be able to find them in sequence depending on what pattern you're going by (every 20th digit counts, or every 17th, etc.). You may not be able to find them for every possible counting pattern, but you'd probably be able to find a counting pattern that would find them in sequence.
pali1d 2 years ago
"You would likely be able to find them in sequence depending on what pattern ..."
Perhaps, but it's not obvious.
TheFallibleFiend 2 years ago
It is not just the digits of Pi that should contain sequences for all videos. Every irrational number should contain the same sequences.
8WholeThing 2 years ago
this was a spectacular clip
325982668 2 years ago
I don't hear people mention the "if god exists, scientists would be studying how that god interacts with the natural world" argument NEARLY enough.
It's the part theists don't seem to understand about my position when I argue with them; they tend to try and claim that science can't investigate god, and I keep pointing out the places where their holy books describe god interacting with the natural world...
It's frustrating, especially since few atheists make this argument back at theists.
BionicDance 2 years ago 2
I am so fed up with arguing with theists now. At the end of the day, I believe no God exists, we are all just conclusions of science and particles, and theists talk shit. Atheism is so much better than religion. You can do anything in life you want, and tbh, death doesnt scare me, you dont feel it, so why should it bother you.
thrashmetalteen 2 years ago
I'm not all that scared of BEING dead...how I GET that way is quite another matter.
'Course, I'd rather be alive...seems more fun.
BionicDance 2 years ago
good point, but im not sure that is being afraid of DEATH or DYING, just pain. :)
thrashmetalteen 2 years ago
Well, how many methods of dying DON'T involve pain?
"Going peacefully in one's sleep," is about the only one I can think of.
BionicDance 2 years ago
Lethal injection, for one, but you're missing the point. My point is, when you are "dying", you are not dead are you? So all you are experiencing is pain, not death. I am afraid of burning my hand on the kettle, for example, but I'm not going to die from it!
thrashmetalteen 2 years ago
Watch the "Penn & Teller: Bullshit!" episode on execution; lethal injection is NOT painless.
Anyway, that's exactly my point: I'm not afraid of BEING dead, just how I end up that way. I'll be alive long enough to feel the pain before I go, and I'd really rather forgo that privilege, yanno?
BionicDance 2 years ago
"Anyway, that's exactly my point: I'm not afraid of BEING dead, just how I end up that way. I'll be alive long enough to feel the pain before I go, and I'd really rather forgo that privilege, yanno?"
That's why I'm actually in favor of suicide, because barring some accident, I'll be able to choose the way that I go out (painless asphyxiation by carbon monoxide). Poor theists don't have the luxury of deciding when and how they die.
I want to go out on my own terms.
787Bisurdaddy 2 years ago