What proof is there of 1/Pi…creating irrational diameter ?

Mathematically speaking ?

But the diameter is a straight line…

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diameter

Not necessarily implied that lines makes circles but that a line with irrational extension would snake its way when drawn.

Depends on the transmission of values in my eyes, however humanity always accepts that those ideals can be misguided by various reasons such as selfishness, the intervention of aliens as @BC rightfully commented

Now then many have tried and many have failed in declaring pi as non-infinite…any other takers?

The former, yes, the latter no. — Christoffer

I take this as an admission then that pi goes on forever. Finally

Me or you now I’m unclear which one of us is doing this fallacy, it must be you as my claim is rather simple that Pi goes on forever therefore infinite.

@Banno

What’s your problem ?

I don’t really care much what denotes what in mathematics but I do know that pi’s expansion goes on infinitely, hence me declaring it infinite.

I still don’t see how or even why you’d object to that.

If you profess some knowledge of Mathematics then you’re clearly unaware of this.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncountable_set

So Pi goes on infinitely buts it’s not infinite, whatever dude.

Usually if my point can’t be fully defended but some aspects can then I bail out, or go Bailey and concede partially.

I would never concede for lack of the other party’s inability to understand.

If they strawman, I point it out but don’t engage, maybe they’re just baiting you lol

If upon making a claim that you know you won’t fully defend then give such concessions at the start of the argument.

First of all that infinite sign that you’ve put there the sideways 8 is a distorted circle, but a circle nonetheless.

Secondly do you deny that Pi goes on forever ? If you deny such a fact and don’t believe that Pi goes on forever then you’re as badly mistaken as Banno I’m afraid.

@Christoffer

Well thank you for that :rofl: pi is not infinite apparently according to Banno, geez!

@Banno anyway we seem to be going in circles. Or perhaps we’re walking in Pies

They’re one and the same, or at least our closest understanding and interpretation of infinity. Neatly summed up and expressed by

Pi is clear as day to me, let the below image remind you again. Read @sime’s post

But that does not make it infinite — Banno

Surely you’re winding me up, but I’m not laughing … Pi is serious business

You persist with this crap, that’s a formula of Pi.

Please paste below the infinite non-repeating sequence of Pi

Pi is not a circle — Banno

Of course it’s a circle what is the value of the line when you’ve performed the calculation circumference/diameter…it’s Pi of course.

Pi is exactly the ratio of circumference to diameter. It is not infinite — Banno

Ok then mister, please give me the exact value of Pi :rofl:

Of course it’s a circle, even though the approximate value is derived from circumference/diameter

if it’s not infinity why haven’t we been able to calculate it’s finite value.

The fact that PI remaining abstract yet embedded, but not fully, by fact of impossibility in the real world in the form of the circle highlights a very profound idea of such an abstraction namely that of a never ending non-repeating number.

In a sense, whilst Pi was known to the Greeks, it is actually a Greek letter in their alphabet, they never truly realised the implications of such a number, even Archimedean approaches never went more than two decimal places, so it’s real infinite nature was not readily apparent.

Though PI itself remaining an abstract with imperfect manifestation of itself in the form of a circle perhaps only comes to our understanding by fact of producing the approximation of such a shape.

PI even has a starting value. 3.14 somewhat implying that if it does have a starting value does infinity too?

I believe, again, that this line of reasoning is incorrect, even though by granting it such a concrete starting value (which is always an approximation), by the fact that this value itself never finishes, let’s it remain in the realm of the abstract and pure mathematics.

A circle is a very close approximation of Pi which is infinity itself.

It doesn’t exist in the real world by the fact that in its close approximation it comes in on itself demonstrates the circularity of such an infinity.

@Tom Storm I think you’re equating indoctrination to ideology in your summary of what it means to be religious . And whilst that may be true of any religion it could also be true of atheists in their every day beliefs about the world.

But yes even as a Christian I’m not dogmatic. But there is a sense of zeal when it comes to knocking down someone’s beliefs. It’s called intolerance.

In this sense prosecuting someone for their beliefs highlights immaturity.

By all means question or be sceptical of idea such as god, but to knock it down altogether is to remain ever in infancy.

equivocation of necessity to possibility.

It’s like saying it’s possible that my next coin flip will be tail. So if I do flip it it will be tails. (By necessity)

I call bullshit on this badly constructed argument (Cosmological, Kalam, Contingent), it should go more like this.

Firstly it over complicates things, if cat, fish, dog is impossible (non-existent) then by fact of existence cat, fish, dog exist then cat, fish, dog exist.

Where does contingency come into it ?

You’re saying im being irrational just like Pi. If pi was rational and predictable yet infinate would it not make a linear straight line rather than a circle ?

Point being, even Isolating Pi to 3 decimal places could you draw a non-perfect circle ?

I don’t blame you Banno, where did this infinite irrational Pi come from, it’s definitely not something physical as a how could a perfect circle exist in the physical world when it can’t be drawn, a perfect circle is only abstract and unable to be represented or drawn because Pi is non-repeating and goes on forever

Is it not purely abstract?

The implication being of course that a perfect circle is not physically possible only in the realms of mathematics.

It’s an example of circular logic in Action. The full Pi is non-repeating and goes on forever. You will draw a very good circle but it won’t be a perfect circle sorry, because you can’t determine Pi

Here, though, you seem to be claiming that a "sequences ad infinitum" implies a closed loop. It doesn't. — Banno

Funnily enough I was aware of the same objection upon writing, well spotted Banno. Still it might be defensible, and quite possible, so, but If it isn’t I will concede.

Here we go. And please bear with me here.

Ad Infinitum of course latin for infinity. The circle of course being dictated by the circumference/diameter produces Pi. Now assume you only know Pi

Let’s simplify

X/y = Pi.

If you only knew Pi, which you obviously can’t as it’s irrational and infinite …could you draw a circle?

Of course not.

Thus, infinity, taking Pi as a currently known example is non-repeating and unpredictable

Pi, draws a straight line in a circle, and since no we can’t square a circle the implication of this is that not only is PI not self-recurring (non-repeating pattern) but that the relations of circumference/radius can never be calculated.

There’s nothing naive about those values, calling them naive with expanding on why strikes me as unjustifed judgment. As such it’s just an opinion, and I’m happy to have a difference of opinion with you, but how could you advocate vanity or revenge when they are negative attributes or actions ? Can you offer an explanation?

Humility enables us avoid the trap of arrogance at the same time allowing us to take instruction and advice. I accept most of those Christian values that I mentioned as they’re good for my soul.

Take the opposite of say humility which is hubris, and the the opposite of compassion is apathy.

On what grounds do you disagree with these moral teachings irrespective of a creator God?

@Wayfarer do you think I’m making sense in the above things regardless of god, certain values are non-negotiable?

The enforcement of sound judgment comes from experience which is first hand account of morality, and education as prescriptive and second hand.

Though one of the 10 commandments says Thou Shalt not Steal, but you do steal. It’s only when you’re stolen from that you understand morality first hand otherwise the precepts of such morality are only prescriptive and serve as a warning against doing so.

I only say that because if I was to carry on I’d be going in circles

At the same time, however, it is also impossible that the first [cause], since it is eternal, should pass away — Aristotle. Metaphysics, 994b5, translated by C.D.C. Reeve

I could understand up to this point, after that I seem to have got lost in translation.

But back to the circle, this self-drawing circle. How could a circle draw itself ? This doesn’t make sense when looking at it from this line of reasoning as it’s metaphorical at best. If it did indeed cause itself then why not a straight line ? Simpler, easier.

This is a non-issue because as you will see the circle answers the question more succinctly then a straight line as logical explanation, it’s our best understanding of infinity as a circle does not have a starting point. Yet when we do draw circles we have a starting point or two starting points to be precise if we wish to draw a near perfect circle the centre and circumference.

there could be more esoteric explanations as to infinity but they’re beyond my understanding.

Yet the simple yet complex circle which in itself contains Pi (itself an infinite) points us in such a direction in our inquiry. An irrational number that stretches forever, a hint there of the nature of infinity.

This apparently random number that has conjured the circle stretching forever yet producing the most simple of shapes, a circle ⭕️

If I elaborate further it will sound like bullshit so I must stop here.

So it’s just a weapon then like a gun.

Then it’s not ai that can be dangerous but man’s maliciousness

Ai is non-intentional, how would it generate intent to pose any sort of threat to man?

Sure if you disagree agree against the precepts of humility, compassion, kindness and the discouragement of vanity and revenge. If your values as an atheist are superior to these then by all means keep them to yourself.

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
— 1 Corinthians 13

I’d describe myself as a Quaker, so no middle men like preachers, priests or any clergy apart from the odd ceremonial occasion such as a wedding or a funeral.

So handpicked values, and I only pick the best

No, I beat stupid people all the time, especially at logic and chess. Although a drunk guy beat me once, perhaps I underestimated him when he says he’d been drinking for 7 hours straight.

There’s all kinds of stupid of course but the advantage of the smart person is they can adapt whereas the stupid not so much.

In any case for me the Christian faith has taught me a few things such as humility, the theist who don’t practice them ain’t a real Christian. It also teaches charity yet I find Christians who are the opposite.

In essence it teaches against vanity and we need this in the age of idols and social media more than ever.

Sure humility and compassion and kindness are secular too but sometimes I just feel like whacking the kardashians with my king James’s over the head repeatedly till they start being a bit kinder or just stop saying stupid shit, and if I fail removing their stupidity at least I’ve removed their dense makeup.

Please note I’m not a woman beater, though I’m sure the bible says to keep women in check somewhere :rofl: