urrrghhhhhhhh thhppt </titile></head> <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><script> (function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){i['GoogleAnalyticsObject']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){ (i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o), m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m) })(window,document,'script','//www.google-analytics.com/analytics.js','ga'); ga('create', 'UA-47423994-1', 'fortunecity.ws'); ga('send', 'pageview'); </script> <center> <br> <div> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="https://ads.geocities.ws/ads/show_ad.php?width=728&height=90"></script> </div> </center> <center> <br> <div style="height:5px"></div> </center> <pre> 3.1415926535897932384626433832795 PI - The Secret of the Universe This article will be quite technical and assumes you are fairly competent in the understanding of how a computer actually processes information. I will go into a bit of a crash course, but if it starts getting too weird for you, good. It is weird. There is an old adage that is similar to "If a million monkeys at a million typewriters were to type for a million years, eventually they would compose the works of Shakespear". Now, the underlying concept of such an idea isn't that the monkeys would eventually learn to write something shakespearian. It's that eventually they would exhaust all other possibilities and therefore Macbeth or Hamlet would be among their previous attempts. Of course, a million years really wouldn't be enough time for such a thing, but hey...let's not get too technical just yet. Pi. The ratio of a circumfrence to its radius. As you all should know, the number can go on and on for infinite precision. It's also been stated that there is no pattern within pi. Whether or not that's true is half of the premise for this paper. The other half is that it never stops. Meaning, you should never get a dividend of 0. Ever. Moving on... The hypothesis is that Pi when divided out far enough could be outputted in base (LETTER) could comprise all the written work ever done, or ever will be done. At the same time, if you were to output it in base(2) and represent it in pixel format, you could show every picture that has ever been done or will be done. The reasoning behind this is that PI won't repeat. On the surface this is a pretty cool idea. Once you dig a bit deeper though, it starts to fall apart. On a side note, I know this isn't very true to the site, but I believed it would work so I started writing it. However, further down in my writing of this, I am seeing huge gaping flaws. So, this paper's aim isn't to convince you that this is possible. Quite the opposite. If I thought of it, then many others in the past already have. Time to dispel the belief for good. ------------------- REPRESENTING WRITTEN LANGUAGE ------------------------ To do this, we have to establish that we would use the decimal representation of a number, and display it with hexadecimal. So, in the terms of ASCII, there are a total of 128 posible characters. We don't really need to use the first 31 though because they are all control codes. We do need to hold onto SPACE though (that's 32). Remember, we are working with a base(10) system, so PI will carry over nicely...in most cases. Now, since we cannot use anything before 32, or after 127 (so far), we need to establish that if the current block of pi we are working with is before or after, to either ignore it or to move it forward one. So, let's say that if it's before our bounding area we will add that number to it. so 1 and 4 will become 14. But since it's still too small it now becomes 141. 141 is now too far out of our bounding box, so we will just ignore it. Next comes 5 which is too small again, so it becomes 59 which can be worked with, and in decimal it becomes ";". So on, and so forth. Just to break down the top number so I'm 100% sure you understand it. 141 59 265 35 89 79 32 38 46 264 33 83 279 5 Becomes: 59 35 89 79 32 38 46 33 83 Becomes: ;#YO &.!S It isn't looking so promising anymore is it? So, what's another option? We can make a table of codes to represent each letter. Which means, our messages will be in a completely different order than someone elses should they choose to do the same thing, but that's irrelevent. We only want to exhaust all possibilities. No matter what the means are, the results will be the same. Let's use the table: 01. A 02. B 03. C 04. D 05. E 06. F 07. G 08. H 09. I 10. J 11. K 12. L 13. M 14. N 15. O 16. P 17. Q 18. R 19. S 20. T 21. U 22. V 23. W 24. X 25. Y 26. Z 27. SPACE With this table we have omited all lower case letters, and all punctuations. Basically, if it were to work, it would be one long string of words with some spaces in between. That's fine, but how do we represent PI now? Because 1 then 4 could easily be AD or it could be N. What should we use? How about 1 will be vowel control? Let's see how that would work 11. A 12. E 13. I 14. O 15. U 11. K 12. L 13. M 14. N 15. O 01. VOWELS 02. B 03. C 04. D 05. L 06. F 07. G 08. H 09. M 10. J 11. A 12. E 13. I 14. O 15. U 16. P 17. Q 18. R 19. S 20. T 21. N 22. V 23. W 24. X 25. Y 26. Z 27. K 28. SPACE We just moved the 01 entry to 27 and made SPACE 28. Then we substituted the 11-15 with vowels and put their consonants in their place. So, the new table should work right? If the number is a 1, we'll go to the next number, and if its not, how do we actually get to the process of getting any higher than 9? With our new method, the top number would be: 3.1415926535897932384626433832795 Becomes: 14 15 9 2 6 5 3 5 8 9 7 9 3 2 3 8 4 6 2 etc Becomes: OUMBFLCLHMGM etc The point is that now nothing is beyond the number 9 unless it starts with a one. Is it starting to become obvious why this idea just won't work? Not only is it impractical, it's very difficult to actually establish a working standard for representing the information. There is always another way to look at it though. How about we take the table we made and instead of starting at 2, we start at 11. This way we can go from 11 to 99 and that's well within the realm of our desired possibilities. Our new table would look something like this: 11. A 12. B 13. C 14. D 15. E 16. F 17. G 18. H 19. I 20. J 21. K 22. L 23. M 24. N 25. O 26. P 27. P 28. Q 29. R 30. S 31. T 32. U 33. V 34. W 35. X 36. Y 37. Z 38. SPACE Of course, now we have totally ignored any possibilities of 39-99. But, for arguments sake, let's just see what happens to our current section of Pi now. 14 15 92 65 35 89 79 32 38 46 26 43 38 32 79 Becomes: 14 15 35 32 38 26 38 32 Becomes: DEXU P U Well, it's getting there. There must be a way to use the rest of the numbers. How about we just repeat the table for now? Because, I know that this is a perfect moment to use lowercase letters, but that's just even more possibilities. This way everything will at least look uniform. 11. A 12. B 13. C 14. D 15. E 16. F 17. G 18. H 19. I 20. J 21. K 22. L 23. M 24. N 25. O 26. P 27. P 28. Q 29. R 30. S 31. T 32. U 33. V 34. W 35. X 36. Y 37. Z 38. SPACE 39. A 40. B 41. C 42. D 43. E 44. F 45. G 46. H 47. I 48. J 49. K 50. L 51. M 52. N 53. O 54. P 55. Q 56. R 57. S 58. T 59. U 60. V 61. W 62. X 63. Y 64. Z 65. SPACE Now, we are using 11-65. Which means 66-99 is still completely unusable. At least we kept the odds of a letter consistant. Well, 65+27 is 92, and that's a hell of a lot closer to what we're after. So, looping that table just one more time should be enough for us. 11. A 12. B 13. C 14. D 15. E 16. F 17. G 18. H 19. I 20. J 21. K 22. L 23. M 24. N 25. O 26. P 27. P 28. Q 29. R 30. S 31. T 32. U 33. V 34. W 35. X 36. Y 37. Z 38. SPACE 39. A 40. B 41. C 42. D 43. E 44. F 45. G 46. H 47. I 48. J 49. K 50. L 51. M 52. N 53. O 54. P 55. Q 56. R 57. S 58. T 59. U 60. V 61. W 62. X 63. Y 64. Z 65. SPACE 66. A 67. B 68. C 69. D 70. E 71. F 72. G 73. H 74. I 75. J 76. K 77. L 78. M 79. N 80. O 81. P 82. Q 83. R 84. S 85. T 86. U 87. V 88. W 89. X 90. Y 91. Z 92. SPACE Optionally at this point we could throw in the punctuations, but that would not give equal weight to all other characters so for now, we wont even bother. With our new table, if we were to convert pi it goes like this: 3.1415926535897932384626433832795 Becomes: 14 15 92 65 35 89 79 32 38 46 26 43 38 32 79 Becomes: DE XXNU HPE UN So, obviously it IS possible, but the effect we want required a lot of weird angles toward the actual problem. You would be much better off just making a random number generator that goes between 32 and 90 (126 if you're feeling bold). Either method would give you every possibility. Of course, you will get repeating values with a RNG, and with PI you wont. Which brings me to my next point. The frequency of certain words would create an impossible situation for PI to represent them. So, in actuality you can't really use lowercased words and punctuation. If you do, the possibility of 115214 (AND) popping up again would be fairly low. However, with a repeating table you can create AND with several different combinations of numbers. In the next part I'll discuss using PI to represent graphical images. Which really is just as boring and even more flawed. ------------------- REPRESENTING GRAPHICS ------------------------ Believe it or not, trying to represent pi in written language is much simpler of a concept than displaying pictures. For one thing, the infrequency of pi makes a lot of pictures completely impossible to begin with. But, I'm getting ahead of myself here. At any rate, you represent a picture through pixels, or PICture ELements. It's just a single one unit by one unit dot on your monitor. It's not important to go into exactly how pixels are working, but it is important to note that a pixel runs a range of 0-255. However, there's three fields: Red, Green, and Blue. In a sense, there's actually two color schemes. The other one is CYGM: Cyan, Yellow, Green, and Magenta. We're gonna concentrate purely on the RGB format though. To express a color, you specify the intensity of each field in the RGB scheme. the most intense is 255 and the least intense is 0. Now, generally in a website, it's expressed in hexadecimal format and 255 is FF. However, it's an unnessacery step to actually getting any pictures. So we're going to stick to the decimal format for the remainder of the paper. If you remember, a big problem was boundaries of characters (Being that there isn't enough of them at times, or too many at others). Well, With this it's the same problem. Let's look at a simple color. BLACK: 0,0,0. Do you see the problem with this? It should be glaringly apparent that I don't even need to carry on this paper. Zero is impossible to get out of pi. With that in mind: 0-255 : 0,10,20,30,40,50,60,70,80,90,100,110,120,130,140,150,160,170,180,190,200,210,220,230,240,250 101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,201,202,203,204,205,206,207,208,209 Every single one of those are impossible values. 44 values will never be displayed. But it gets worse than that. 44 values per field of RGB won't be displayed. Now, normally with a color set you get 16 million possible colors. That is 256^3. Anyway, 256-44 is 212. 212^3 is 9,528,128. We lose 7,249,088 colors. So, obviously we cannot ever print every picture possible. In fact, the chances of one pixel being the same color as the next one is also most likely impossible. Let's analyze how much it would take to just make one single 32x32 picture...an icon. The area of a 32x32 square is 1024. That means there will be 1024 pixels to plot on that particular icon alone. Assuming we steal from pi a nine digit number each time we create just one picture of 32x32, we would have to draw out the precision 9216 places. Creating only 4 icons we'd have to draw out pi 32,864 places. In fact, to actually use every single possible combination (within our current constraints) we would have to create 9,528,128^1024 icons. Which means we'd have to calculate pi out to 2.87e767 places. Again, this is still assuming every value is usable and we use 3 sets of 3 numbers per pixel. There is a way around all of this though. However, we will never be able to create that many icons. We can use the number as a grayscale. Meaning, when we find out the first number is 141 our RGB scheme will be 141,141,141. This means we only have to draw out pi by 3 numbers for each pixel instead of nine. How far out is that you ask? Well, actually pretty small comparatively. We'd only have to calculate the first 3072 places of pi. Even as an experiment of 5 simple grayscal pi pictures, thats 15,360 precision. The cold, hard fact is that pi is not the secret to the universe. You can express everything in pi theoretically, but you can't actually put the method to practice. I'm sorry to break the bad news to you. Pi is still just the ratio between a circumfrence and radius of a circle. There's no hidden meaning. </pre> </body>  <center> <div> <br> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="https://ads.geocities.ws/ads/show_ad.php?width=300&height=250&cache=0"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript" src="https://ads.geocities.ws/ads/show_ad.php?width=300&height=250"></script> </div> <br> <br> </center> </html>