Go Back   Cricket Web > Other > Off Topic



Finding Seams on Apples - Order Your Copy!


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-09-2010, 01:11 PM   #136 (permalink)
International Coach
 
PhoenixFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bitch please, I'm from West Yorkshire
Posts: 14,986
Quote:
Originally Posted by cover drive man View Post
Couldn't you say that all constants are irrational?
No. The two things are quite unrelated. Some constants like e and pi are irrational, but not all of them by any means.

Actually that said, I can't actually think of any mathematical constants that are rational, but I'm sure there are some. I know of some physical ones however...

Edit again, i is rational. That said, there is no absolute definition of what is and what isn't a constant, it's more a general term used to describe some numbers and not others. I'm sure an argument could be made that googol/googolplex are constants of sorts and they are both rational.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Top_Cat View Post
1) Had double pneumonia as a kid, as did my twin sis. Doctors told my parents to pray that we lived through the night. Dad said **** off, I'm an atheist, you ****s better save my kids, etc. Then prayed anyway.

Last edited by PhoenixFire; 07-09-2010 at 01:17 PM.
PhoenixFire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 01:16 PM   #137 (permalink)
Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator
 
Neil Pickup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Oxford, England
Posts: 26,361
Quote:
Originally Posted by cover drive man View Post
Couldn't you say that all constants are irrational?
1 is a constant (the result derived when you divide something by itself)
__________________
MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com | AAAS Chairman
CricketWeb Black | CricketWeb XI Captain
ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You?

Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC

Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog
Neil Pickup is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 01:21 PM   #138 (permalink)
Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
 
Uppercut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 21,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixFire View Post
Edit again, i is rational.
No you're not.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaremba View Post
The Filth have comfortably the better bowling. But the Gash have the batting. Might be quite good to watch.
Uppercut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 05:46 PM   #139 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,745
Remember though, that physical constants - aren't. They depend completely on your choice of units which is completely arbitrary. (w/ the exception of alpha and its friends)
__________________
+ and the buzz surrounds it does +


* * *

in which cribb demonstrates the power of the jinx


Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
[Dhoni on 99] Barely seen any of the day's play (for sanity's sake), but here's a competition that might be fun: things more common than a Tim Bresnan wicket
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince EWS View Post
3) Dhoni scoring a composed, valuable Test hundred against good bowlers
Quote:
129.1 Anderson to Dhoni, OUT, Dhoni is run out on 99!

Last edited by Spark; 07-09-2010 at 05:50 PM.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 08:48 PM   #140 (permalink)
International 12th Man
 
Quaggas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixFire View Post
No. The two things are quite unrelated. Some constants like e and pi are irrational, but not all of them by any means.

Actually that said, I can't actually think of any mathematical constants that are rational, but I'm sure there are some. I know of some physical ones however...

Edit again, i is rational. That said, there is no absolute definition of what is and what isn't a constant, it's more a general term used to describe some numbers and not others. I'm sure an argument could be made that googol/googolplex are constants of sorts and they are both rational.
Am I missing something? i \neq n/m, for any n,m integer, assuming you mean i \equiv \sqrt(-1).
Quaggas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 08:51 PM   #141 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,745
i ain't rational, as the rationals are a subset of the reals.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 08:53 PM   #142 (permalink)
International Vice-Captain
 
Redbacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Barrow Island, WA
Posts: 4,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neil Pickup View Post
I appreciated that, even if nobody else did.
You have made a young man happy
Redbacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:02 PM   #143 (permalink)
International Vice-Captain
 
Redbacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Barrow Island, WA
Posts: 4,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by cover drive man View Post
Question:

What's the difference between an irrational number and a constant?
Not really an apples v apples comparison.
Redbacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:03 PM   #144 (permalink)
International 12th Man
 
Quaggas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
Remember though, that physical constants - aren't. They depend completely on your choice of units which is completely arbitrary. (w/ the exception of alpha and its friends)
The units go along with the physical constant - so changing units doesn't change the constant.
Quaggas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:07 PM   #145 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaggas View Post
The units go along with the physical constant - so changing units doesn't change the constant.
it changes the value of the constant... and the value is the only thing that matters, isn't it?

Again, with the exception of alpha and its friends (i forget what they all are) which are dimensionless, so are completely independent of your units. alpha is always 1/137-point-something regardless if you're in SI, Gaussian, Planck, whatever.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:10 PM   #146 (permalink)
The Wheel is Forever
 
silentstriker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 36,497
Well, no. It's the underlying physical phenomena that matters. The speed of light is the speed of light, regardless of whether you use km or miles...

The inherent quantity doesn't change, just the number you use to express it.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by KungFu_Kallis View Post
Peter Siddle top scores in both innings....... Matthew Wade gets out twice in one ball
"The future light cone of the next Indian fast bowler is exactly the same as the past light cone of the previous one"
-My beliefs summarized in words much more eloquent than I could come up with

How the Universe came from nothing
silentstriker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:15 PM   #147 (permalink)
International 12th Man
 
Quaggas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 1,531
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
it changes the value of the constant... and the value is the only thing that matters, isn't it?

Again, with the exception of alpha and its friends (i forget what they all are) which are dimensionless, so are completely independent of your units. alpha is always 1/137-point-something regardless if you're in SI, Gaussian, Planck, whatever.
e.g., mass of proton is 938.2...MeV/c^2 = 0.9382...GeV/c^2 = 1.67...E-27kg. The "numbers" change, the constant doesn't (those equals signs have the usual meaning).

Of course, there is some evidence that physical "constants" change/have changed through time (I'm not advocating that the world is 4000 years old because the decay constant of C14 has changed)

Edit Beaten to it
Quaggas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:16 PM   #148 (permalink)
Global Moderator
 
Spark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: A Blood Rainbow
Posts: 26,745
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentstriker View Post
Well, no. It's the underlying physical phenomena that matters. The speed of light is the speed of light, regardless of whether you use km or miles...

The inherent quantity doesn't change, just the number you use to express it.
yeah but we're talking about the constants themselves here, not what they mean. so to talk about the physical constants as if they have some intractable fixed value is wrong. i mean, for any of those constants c, e, h, G, whatever, i could pick a units system such that it's 1 and dimensionless, which kind of "eliminates" the constant.

it's just a thing we chuck in our equations to make sure they work. but they all have to be consistent with the dimensionless constants, that's the central rule.
Spark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:27 PM   #149 (permalink)
The Wheel is Forever
 
silentstriker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 36,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spark View Post
yeah but we're talking about the constants themselves here, not what they mean. so to talk about the physical constants as if they have some intractable fixed value is wrong. i mean, for any of those constants c, e, h, G, whatever, i could pick a units system such that it's 1 and dimensionless, which kind of "eliminates" the constant.

it's just a thing we chuck in our equations to make sure they work. but they all have to be consistent with the dimensionless constants, that's the central rule.
I think we're arguing semantics here. When CDM asked and I said physical constant, I was referring to the 'meaning', rather than a specific number. Obviously (many) constants are things that we just need to fudge our equations with to make them work, and then assign probably 'meanings' to them later on, but in other cases, it is still a fundamental quantity that means something. G might be 'chucked in', but c has a much more concrete meaning.

BTW, natural units FTL.
silentstriker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 09:29 PM   #150 (permalink)
The Wheel is Forever
 
silentstriker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 36,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quaggas View Post
Of course, there is some evidence that physical "constants" change/have changed through time (I'm not advocating that the world is 4000 years old because the decay constant of C14 has changed)
Sure you aren't. Get away from me.

It was hilariously epic when the news came out that c may not have always been c. Millions of creationists became faux-physicists for a day and waxed poetically for weeks.
silentstriker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tech Geeks Thread SupaFreak2005 Off Topic 233 03-11-2012 03:15 PM
*Nikhil Hearing* Details Thread lord_of_darkness Cricket Web XI 329 17-12-2004 03:21 PM
**Official** South Africa in India Thread Neil Pickup Cricket Chat 453 08-12-2004 07:26 AM
*Official* India in Australia Thread Craig Cricket Chat 2652 08-01-2004 07:00 PM
*Official* West Indies in Zimbabwe Thread Mr Mxyzptlk Cricket Chat 554 01-12-2003 03:11 AM


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:00 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Copyright ©2001 - 2011, Cricket Web