Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science
From: aeo6 (aeo6_at_cornell.edu)
Date: 03/02/05
- Next message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Infinite series evaluation"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2005 10:26:59 -0500
robert j. kolker said:
>
>
> Daryl McCullough wrote:
> >
> > I would say that an angular measure in which a full circle has measure
> > 1 seems pretty natural, too, and just as easy to communicate to aliens.
>
> That is also true. But defining the ciclre a s 360 somethings is rather
> contrived and arbitrary? Why not 361? Why not 359?
>
> Bob Kolker
>
360 makes sense because it is divisible by many numbers including the
angles in common geometrical shapes: 30, 45, 60, 90, 120. Pi makes sense
when dealing with sine and cosine functions because it makes the
derivative of one the value (or its negative) of the other: sin=1 where
cos'=-1, cos=1 where sin'=1. The unit circle is useful in tiling and
polyhedral applications. Depends what you're doing.
-- Smiles, Tony
- Next message: Robin Chapman: "Re: Infinite series evaluation"
- Previous message: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- In reply to: robert j. kolker: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Next in thread: Lester Zick: "Re: Epistemology 201: The Science of Science"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
