cosecantphi

joined 5 years ago
[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 7 points 1 week ago (1 children)

nah, this is just the appetizer to a big bowl of pasta made out of antimatter.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

Right and the point of defining this number as a non-repeating infinite sequence of 0s and 1s is just to show that non-repetition of digits alone is not sufficient to say a number contains all finite sequences.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Math kind of relies on assumptions, you really can't get anywhere in math without an assumption at the beginning of your thought process.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

That's a decimal approximation of Pi with an ellipsis at the end to indicate its an approximation, not a definition. The way the ellipsis is used above is different. It's being used to define a number via the decimal expansion by saying it's an infinite sum of negative powers of 10 defined by the pattern before the ellipsis.

So we have:

0.101001000100001000001 . . . = 10^-1 + 10^-2 + 10^-3 + 10^-4 +10^-5+ . . .

Pi, however, is not defined this way. Pi can be defined as twice the solution of the integral from -1 to 1 of the square root of (1-x^2), a function defining a unit semi-circle.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (5 children)

Implicitly defining a number via it's decimal form typically relies on their being a pattern to follow after the ellipsis. You can define a different number with twos in it, but if you put an ellipsis at the end you're implying there's a different pattern to follow for the rest of the decimal expansion, hence your number is not the same number as the one without twos in it.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 7 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (9 children)

It's implicitly defined here by its decimal form:

0.101001000100001000001 . . .

The definition of this number is that the number of 0s after each 1 is given by the total previous number of 1s in the sequence. That's why it can't contain 2 despite being infinite and non-repeating.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 29 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

That makes it even worse. Imagine putting in all this effort and taking all this supposed risk to create a new social media platform free of the pitfalls that come with a for profit site like reddit only to slowly adopt the exact same corporate friendly code of conduct while purposefully curating a community of annoying shitheads who are nearly indistinguishable from the horde of cretins on reddit.

If making a new reddit is legitimately the best they can do, then they should absolutely just scuttle the entire project.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It's based, actually. So is stealing from businesses. In fact, if piracy really was the same as stealing, I'd definitely make a point of pirating more often

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 14 points 2 years ago (14 children)

Tbh, I lose some amount of respect for anyone who mentions they pay for media that is easily accessed through piracy, netflix included

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 21 points 2 years ago

Hexbear is literally the only place on the entirety of the internet where I can be vulnerable in my posts without worry it's going to be used in harassment against me by some reactionary freak.

r/chapotraphouse was one of the most accepting and inclusive subreddits of all time on reddit when it came to not punching down, and Hexbear is orders of magnitude better than even that.

[–] cosecantphi@hexbear.net 65 points 2 years ago (9 children)

Youtube's use of A/B testing is very smart in that it's actually nothing about testing user response and all about limiting the number of people they piss off at once with their god awful changes.

The day I can't block ads on the internet is the day I stop using the internet.

view more: next ›