Space in relative relation to Pi

[Spenner]

If space (judging on what scientist have come up with over the years) is nearly infinitely large (for at least one point in time before contraction occurs), then the possibilities within the planetary system could be widely ranged, correct? Now, taking that the universe (for now) is ultra-large, within maybe 1/10000000000000000000 there is a chance that there would be life. Now, taking those digits into a more expressional value, like 1415926535' etc, you could expect that within pi, as many times as those exact number statements repeat, that would be the number of relative planets in our system exist with the possibility of life. Of course, this would still be next to impossible to predict, as the number statement chosen would be the result of how it is shown throughout the rest of Pi (which is also infinitely set). Say you have 159-- that would repeat possibly more than something like 265. So, taking a number statement in the thirties of digits would mean that the number would need to be 100% accurate in order to make a correct prediction of life. A value could be set to certain variables for calculations of statements, but that would mean lots of surveys and thinking and work. If only there was an equation to predict the repetitive numbers within pi, we would be well on our way to predicting life in the other galaxies.

Does anyone else here see where I am going with this?

[9_ki_kid]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Well if Pi is infinite, then how would we ever figure out where we are in Pi?

Well If Pi is infinite I can say this.
But I think maybe the world has a lot to do with Pi, because Pi has a lot to do with circles, and you can never make a perfect circle, just like you can never write Pi out perfectly because it keeps going deeper. But our world has a lot to do with circles (or ovals). Things orbit in circles (or ovals), planets are shaped like circles. (ile think of more not having to do with gravity.)
When an object spreads out it often spreads out equally in all directions, or in other words, propagates. That forms a circle. Objects also often suck things in equally in all directions. Plus everything has to branch off of something.

[devonin]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Does anyone else here see where I am going with this?

Where you seem to be going with this looks like completely and utterly bogus theory.

Correct me if I'm wrong, that this is your process:

The universe is "infinitely large"
Pi as a number is "infinitely large"
If we know the "odds" of life existing", the number of times that string appears in Pi, is the number of places where life exists.

Is that vaguely where you were going with that?

See here's the problem: If we grant you premise 1 and 2 (Which aren't actually provable facts) the answer is "the string will appear an infinite number of times" which will tell you, according to your theory, that there are an infinite number of planets on which life exists, which isn't exactly helpful for anything.

[jewpinthethird]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

But our world has a lot to do with circles. Things orbit in circles, planets are shaped like circles. (ile think of more not having to do with gravity.)
When an object spreads out it often spreads out equally in all directions, or in other words, propagates. That forms a circle. Objects also often suck things in equally in all directions. Plus everything has to branch off of something.

Planets bulge at their equators and are nowhere near perfect circles. Planets orbit about the sun in an elliptical fashion. The planets more or less are falling into the sun, but they are traveling fast enough, so that they are instead flung back out into space...only to reach a point when they fall back towards the sun.



"Circles" are Euclidean Geometry, and Euclidean Geometry only really applies to man made shapes (squares, circles, trapezoids, etc.). You don't find Euclidean geometric shapes in nature (at least, not on the macro scale).

[devonin]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

The earth is an "Oblate Spheroid" by proper shape, if you're interested. It has a slight bulge near but not on the equator.

[9_ki_kid]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

If we grant you premise 1 and 2 (Which aren't actually provable facts)

Nothing is truly provable, you might say this object is solid, but what if your actually going crazy. You might say, watch as this black hole sucks in planets, but what if it is a false projection of light caused by reflections or something.
But according to the laws of sciences, the world must have existed forever and must keep existing forever, (you cannot destroy or create matter) and if everything did exist forever than it would all be consumed by black holes by now, unless there is really unlimited matter in the universe!

Jewpinthethird, even if you have an oval on your hands you still need Pi to calculate it's dimensions. I just used the wrong word using circles. Gravity is still in the shape of a circle at nature, but sometimes things interfere to make it off shape.


Wait, does a black hole destroy matter, or just suck it in?

[devonin]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Nothing is truly provable

Then why are you stating things in your posts as though they are facts? if you're going to object to what I said on "You can't conclusively prove anything" grounds, then everything you try to claim also falls apart.

If however, you are of the opinion that plenty of things can and are proven, you -still- can't prove that the universe or pi are infinite.

[9_ki_kid]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

I believe things are only provable through theory, because the senses can be tricked. Sorry about the miss-type.

Does a black hole destroy matter, or just suck it in? Because if it destroys matter, then my theory isn't worth anything.

[devonin]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

I believe things are only provable through theory, because the senses can be tricked.

Um...theories are necessarily unproven, or else they wouldn't be theories. And also, how can you ever even theorize -anything- without having appealed to empirical information at some point? I mean...the entire scientific method is built around gathering empirical evidence through experimentation.

[9_ki_kid]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Well when you see or feel or smell or whatever something, than you know it's something, but you don't know what it is, you just know it is there for a reason.
Even if you were going crazy, you know your subconscious mind wants you to sense that for some reason.
So many theories are based off of unprovable information, the fact that this exists in some sort of space-time framework our mind has set up cannot be denied. What I'm saying is, you know that you think something is there, you just don't know what the thought comes from.

and does a black hole destroy matter?

[GuidoHunter]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Pi is constructed by an infinite series, so why is its length in question, here? Even if you were arguing that somewhere down the line it might start repeating, I'm pretty sure that's still a mathematical impossibility.

Why do you say its infinite nature can't be proven?

@9 ki: no, black holes do not destroy matter. They attract it into a very dense volume, but it's all still there.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[devonin]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Why do you say its infinite nature can't be proven?

Strongly likely, yes. Proven? No. it's pretty much a logical impossibility to prove 100% that anything is infinite, because no matter how far down you go, there still exists the possibility that you could hit an end, even if that possibility is staggeringly unlikely.

[Sh4d0wRe4p3r666]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

Well if Pi is infinite, then how would we ever figure out where we are in Pi?

But I think maybe the world has a lot to do with Pi, because Pi has a lot to do with circles, and you can never make a perfect circle, just like you can never write Pi out perfectly because it keeps going deeper. But our world has a lot to do with circles (or ovals). Things orbit in circles (or ovals), planets are shaped like circles. (ile think of more not having to do with gravity.)
When an object spreads out it often spreads out equally in all directions, or in other words, propagates. That forms a circle. Objects also often suck things in equally in all directions. Plus everything has to branch off of something.

You can't really say if Pi is infinite. Pi is infinite for only right now until it's found that Pi does end. I wonder how long Pi will go? Hm...

[9_ki_kid]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

So you cannot prove it by physically showing it, I know. But it may be possible for someone to logically prove it. It's like a math equation. You can mathematically express the number of electrons that will be orbiting an atom without even seeing it. Some math equations can equal infinity, as long as infinity is used to find that infinity. What variable equals infinity? Time.
What could ever cause time to start or stop? I used that variable in my theory.

And I changed some of my first post into the word "if"

[Sh4d0wRe4p3r666]

Re: Space in relative relation to Pi

So you cannot prove it by physically showing it, I know. But it may be possible for someone to logically prove it. It's like a math equation. You can mathematically express the number of electrons that will be orbiting an atom without even seeing it. Some math equations can equal infinity, as long as infinity is used to find that infinity. What variable equals infinity? Time.
What could ever cause time to start or stop? I used that variable in my theory.

And I changed some of my first post into the word "if"

I wonder what Spenner is going to think when he gets back onto this thread.

If Pi is infinite and you're trying to compare it with the planetary system, then it doesn't make sense to our planetary system because in 4.6 billion years the sun will burn out and end the human race. Unless they have done the impossible in the future then I'm wrong. I believe that the galaxy is infinite with others. I can't really support this but I'll try to.