The Tau Manifesto

[Chris Padilla]

http://tauday.com/tau-manifesto

I just ran across this today and found it quite fascinating.

Pi is wrong! :)

The basic premise is that 2*pi shows up SO MUCH in mathematics that we should just use tau (tau = 2*pi).

[Kev Williams]

toMAYto, toMAHto...

I've never been much good at heavy math and geometry, but I already know how to figure the volume of a cylinder by using pi.
A different approach to end up with the same results is pointless in my opinion...

[Larry Frank]

A difference with no significance

[Ole Anderson]

Someone has way too much time on their hands.

[Bill Orbine]

Somebody went too all that trouble to double the pi?

[Jamie Buxton]

Well, pi exists without the 2 in that most astonishing relationship: e^^i*pi=-1.

[Stephen Tashiro]

A more extensive revision of trigonometry is advocated in the "WildTrig" series of videos by Prof. Norman Wildberger on YouTube.

[Jay Nossen]

BOOM!
e^(i*TAU)=1
BOOM!

I love the TAU manifesto.

[Chris Padilla]

BOOM! I love it. It is unfortunate, I think, that whomever decided way back when (somewhere around the 1600s if the videos I saw are correct) to make pi=3.1415... instead of making pi=6.2831....

[Jamie Buxton]

... It is unfortunate, I think, that whomever decided way back when (somewhere around the 1600s if the videos I saw are correct) to make pi=3.1415... instead of making pi=6.2831....

The fundamental definition of pi is pretty natural: it is the ratio of the circumference of a circle to the diameter. (No factor of two necessary.) The concept has been around since people have been thinking about geometry. The ancient Greek mathematicians were trying to find a value for pi three thousand years ago. In the intervening time, we've gotten more precise about it. For a while, 22/7 was considered pretty good.

[Lee Schierer]

... instead of making pi=6.2831....

Then to find the circumference of a circle you would use C=.4pi d and area = .5 pi r^2

Personally I prefer Blackberry pi(e) :rolleyes:

[Chris Padilla]

I don't want to cut and paste from the first page of the website I posted but at least read Section 1 (and Section 2 will help even more) and you'll see that there are several valid points to why pi maybe should've be defined as twice its current standing. Then come back and let's discuss it if you like.

As to Jamie and Lee's points: tau = C/r or C=r*tau. No pesky 2pi in there.

As to the area, true, we have a pesky 1/2 in there: 1/2*tau*r^2. But the argument is that 1/2*ab^2 appears quite a bit in physics: 1/2*mv^2, 1/2*kx^2, 1/2*gt^2.... This is all discussed in Section 3 were you to get that far.

(Section 4.1 even has a very small reference to woodworkers who like to use that "spinny" thing to make bowls and such ;) )

[Pat Barry]

I was taught that pi is the area of a circle of unit radius = 1. All other pi based fun facts are derived from that most basic definition. This Tau thing is therefore nonsense

[Bill Orbine]

I was taught that pi is the area of a circle of unit radius = 1. All other pi based fun facts are derived from that most basic definition. This Tau thing is therefore nonsense

Ring-ding-a-ling! Pi is the baseline constant for the circle.

[Chris Padilla]

Yes, that is true for the area of a circle but pi goes well beyond calculating the area of a circle. Expand your minds a bit, Folks. :)

[Leigh Betsch]

I knew that. Kids stuff.
But how to sharpen a chisel?, that's a question worth studying....

[Bert Kemp]

yep I got alll that :D:confused::eek: