LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksA perfect circle must have an infinite number of edges, and I don’t see how this is possible, and even if it was possible, would it be possible to measure? I find this very interesting and would love to hear someone else’s thoughts about this.
May 25th, 2023, 07:11 PM
A perfect circle must have an infinite number of edges, and I don’t see how this is possible, and even if it was possible, would it be possible to measure? I find this very interesting and would love to hear someone else’s thoughts about this.
x2 + y2 = r2
Look at the series: 1/2, 1/3,1/4...1/n
As n gets larger and larger, the result of the fraction approaches 0, but never reaches it. But that doesn't mean 0 can't exist.
In the same way, just because you can't get to a circle by continuing to add sides to a polygon doesn't mean a circle can't exist.
Does it(a perfect circle) exist in the physical world?Originally Posted by Janus
Or is asymmetry built into all physical objects?
theoretically yes ,it is of course possible.
in complex analysis , a line can be assumed / accepted as a circle.
may I ask , what did you mean by a specific keyword "measure" here?
external question: do you have any mathematical background of knowledge? (Detected keyword as a potential reason for this question: "measure")
Measure meaning “if we succeeded in making a perfect circle, or saw a perfect circle, could be measure it?”theoretically yes ,it is of course possible.
in complex analysis , a line can be assumed / accepted as a circle.
may I ask , what did you mean by a specific keyword "measure" here?
external question: do you have any mathematical background of knowledge? (Detected keyword as a potential reason for this question: "measure")
this is irrelevant / unexpected response.Measure meaning “if we succeeded in making a perfect circle, or saw a perfect circle, could be measure it?”theoretically yes ,it is of course possible.
in complex analysis , a line can be assumed / accepted as a circle.
may I ask , what did you mean by a specific keyword "measure" here?
external question: do you have any mathematical background of knowledge? (Detected keyword as a potential reason for this question: "measure")
if you used this word with the meaning as same as it passes for in every daily routine actions, then no you can never measure any quantity if it is defined as infinitive.
it is just a definition to me and I do not know why you are asking such a question.
meanwhile, perfect is not a mathematical description to me , rather , it is qualitative & subjective.
Perfect circle is a mathematical construct. Measuring as you used it is physical. What physical object are you trying to measure?
I am mathematician and I do not recognize this description unless you implied "ring(s)" by "circle".
That is strange .I understand perfectly what mathman said.I am mathematician and I do not recognize this description unless you implied "ring(s)" by "circle".
Does being a mathematician make it hard to understand simple statements?
To the same degree that we could measure a "perfect" square, or a "perfect" equilateral triangle, etc. There's nothing special about a circle in that regard.Measure meaning “if we succeeded in making a perfect circle, or saw a perfect circle, could be measure it?”theoretically yes ,it is of course possible.
in complex analysis , a line can be assumed / accepted as a circle.
may I ask , what did you mean by a specific keyword "measure" here?
external question: do you have any mathematical background of knowledge? (Detected keyword as a potential reason for this question: "measure")
I did not say "I do not understand " just said that "I did not recognize" such a description.That is strange .I understand perfectly what mathman said.I am mathematician and I do not recognize this description unless you implied "ring(s)" by "circle".
Does being a mathematician make it hard to understand simple statements?
(lets take a suitable glasses for yourself if you have trouble to see what I write)
Last edited by unknown_artist; May 27th, 2023 at 02:41 PM.
Are you saying mathman's description is wrong?I did not say "I do not understand " just said that "I did not recognize" such a description.That is strange .I understand perfectly what mathman said.I am mathematician and I do not recognize this description unless you implied "ring(s)" by "circle".
Does being a mathematician make it hard to understand simple statements?
(lets take a suitable glasses for yourself if you have trouble to see what I write
And why did you not answer mathman's question?
1)I did not say that his description was wrong or right. I just said that as mathematician I did not recognize such a description.1) Are you saying mathman's description is wrong?That is strange .I understand perfectly what mathman said.I am mathematician and I do not recognize this description unless you implied "ring(s)" by "circle".
Does being a mathematician make it hard to understand simple statements?
I did not say "I do not understand " just said that "I did not recognize" such a description.
(lets take a suitable glasses for yourself if you have trouble to see what I write
2) And why did you not answer mathman's question?
2)Because he asked that question to OP!
eh!, it seems you not only do not understand something but also confuse!
check the contexts carefully please.
But which is it?
So do perfect circles actually exist in the physical world?I just said that as mathematician I did not recognize such a description.
So do you have an answer or not?2)Because he asked that question to OP!
A) I did not understand what you ask here clearly. But once again, I want to say that I did not say that that description was wrong or right.A) But which is it?
B)So do perfect circles actually exist in the physical world?I just said that as mathematician I did not recognize such a description.
C)So do you have an answer or not?2)Because he asked that question to OP!
B) I do not know. I am not sure whether a mathematician would be willing to deal such an irrelevant problem but in my personal opinion, I think it is rather valueless question regarding academic mathematics.
,if for instance, it was a circle defined by any type of laurent series, then a mathematician would perfectly be willing to deal with that, but in the current case...
C) As clearly explained in detail, I have no idea about perfect circle, as a mathematician.
Then why are you "contributing"?
as I provided , by some specific keyword(s),I gave probability that the issue which OP redirected might have relevance with mathematics.Then why are you "contributing"?
for instance , when I see "measure" keyword ,I supposed he mentions something about measure theory (Real analysis ,check please) but I clearly see no context is given that might create (cor)relation between these two issues. so , no mathematical relevance is available in this regard.
I also attemped to understand "rings" by circle as someone may confuse these two description in transliterational understanding. but it seems no. (check please the KJW's equation which we give to primary school students (it is very easy))
By whole assessing this thread , I could not find any critical relevance with mathematics. this is a thread which may fall inside with high school level or primary school level maths rather than BSc level maths.
What is your first language?I struggle to understand what you are saying.as I provided , by some specific keyword(s),I gave probability that the issue which OP redirected might have relevance with mathematics.Then why are you "contributing"?
for instance , when I see "measure" keyword ,I supposed he mentions something about measure theory (Real analysis ,check please) but I clearly see no context is given that might create (cor)relation between these two issues. so , no mathematical relevance is available in this regard.
I also attemped to understand "rings" by circle as someone may confuse these two description in transliterational understanding. but it seems no. (check please the KJW's equation which we give to primary school students (it is very easy))
By whole assessing this thread , I could not find any critical relevance with mathematics. this is a thread which may fall inside with high school level or primary school level maths rather than BSc level maths.
you are stupid!What is your first language?I struggle to understand what you are saying.as I provided , by some specific keyword(s),I gave probability that the issue which OP redirected might have relevance with mathematics.Then why are you "contributing"?
for instance , when I see "measure" keyword ,I supposed he mentions something about measure theory (Real analysis ,check please) but I clearly see no context is given that might create (cor)relation between these two issues. so , no mathematical relevance is available in this regard.
I also attemped to understand "rings" by circle as someone may confuse these two description in transliterational understanding. but it seems no. (check please the KJW's equation which we give to primary school students (it is very easy))
By whole assessing this thread , I could not find any critical relevance with mathematics. this is a thread which may fall inside with high school level or primary school level maths rather than BSc level maths.
Geordie, just ignore him, he has form for posting incoherent irrelevancies and being a jerk when asked to explain what he means...
Yes I half remember previous episodes but was curious what is his or her first language since that can sometimes help to understand what they may be trying to say.
I am going to guess he is Belgianor Breton ,maybe.
Very good English apart from that.
In high school geometry, circles are defined. Also in high school physics, measuring things us taught. These should do for this discussion.
See you in 3 days.
| « Ellipses and hyperbolas of decompositions of even numbers into pairs of prime numbers | - » |
| Tags for this Thread |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
