17 Oct
2011
17 Oct
'11
7:10 p.m.
On 17/10/11 4:55 PM, Tony Duell wrote:
Heck, 355/113 got us to the moon! In fact it's so practical and sensible
it should be legislated as the OFFICIAL approximation to ?.
--T
>> I have never understood the windespread use of that approximation.
>> 355/113 is more accurate and easier to remember
>
> I never understood the popularity of that approximation. 52163/16604 is
> more accurate.
It is, but only slightly. The abvsolute error is 2.6621e-7 as against
2.6676e-7 for 355/113, And it's a lot harder to remember.
I never understood the popularity of that
approximation. 86953/27678 is
more accurate. (*)
Sure, and there ae ever more accurate rational approximations. THing is,
355/113 is very easy to remember and is accurate enough for a lot of
work. If I am calcuating the circumference of a part I am turning on the
lathe, I can't measure the diameter to anything like 6 significant
figures, so taking $\pi$ as 355/113 does not significantly degrade the
result.
-tony