2007-07-17 21:22:38 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Mathematics
Actually pi is an irrational number and is NOT a fraction so K Shiva is wrong, like your tutor is wrong. Probably he was badly taught at school. Any fraction that is proposed as a value for pi is an approximation only, some better, some worse.
The fraction 355/113 (3.141592) as an approximation to pi was known to the ancient Babylonians. who used a base-60 (sexagesimal) number system. It is accurate to 6 decimal places
one seventh is the recurring decimal 0.142857142857142857 .... so your tutor. almost four thousand years later, has obviously rounded 3 1/7 (22/7) to 5 decimal places to produce 3.14286, which is only accurate to just TWO decimal places, and. as such, a worse approximation than the Babylonians with a base-60 number system could manage, four millennia previously!
2007-07-17 22:20:39 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Your tutor has used the approximation to pi 22/7 to 5 decimal places and not the accurate figure of 3.14159 (to 5 dp)
I did get told at school that when the British Navy are setting exams on basic maths and engineering that the British Admiralty states that pi is 22/7
2007-07-18 04:48:27 · answer #2 · answered by Bob H 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This old topic again! What fun!
Many people think that pi IS 22/7 and will never accept their mistake. Your tutor trying to teach you the incorrect value might explain why so many are mistaken, and they have a unshakable but unfounded faith in their schooling.
However, 22/7 gives 3.14286 (to 5 decimal places)
but pi is 3.14159 (to 5 decimal places), so you are correct.
Ask your tutor. It is reasonable to use 22/7 as an approximation in school exercises, but that value should not be used in accurate engineering calculations.
2007-07-18 01:15:06 · answer #3 · answered by Nick J 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Your tutor is wrong! Pi is the sum of an infinite series, there are many such formulae. What is the subject of your tutorials, I hope he isn't helping with maths? He has used the puerile approximation of 22/7.
Incidentally, one answer suggested this was "long division": It isn't, it's short division.
There are many ways to memorize π, including the use of piems, which are poems that represent π in a way such that the length of each word (in letters) represents a digit. Here is an example of a piem: How I need a drink, alcoholic in nature (or: of course), after the heavy lectures involving quantum mechanics. Notice how the first word has 3 letters, the second word has 1, the third has 4, the fourth has 1, the fifth has 5, the sixth has 9, and so on.
2007-07-17 22:35:14 · answer #4 · answered by Denis Law 1 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I thought t as 3.14159 as well, i memorised it when i was at college, however, when saw the other option it did confuse me a little and now i'm not sure.
here is a quote from 'ask Dr math' (i id a google search).
'For the sake of usefulness people often need to approximate pi. For many purposes you can use 3.14159, which is really pretty good, but if you want a better approximation you can use a computer to get it. Here's pi to many more digits: 3.14159265358979323846.'
So it is 3.14159
2007-07-17 21:36:25 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Three is a first approximation to PI. As far as we know PI is a number with no exact solution in other words it is likely to have a very large number of decimals. If we take the argument to its logical conclusion we can say that if the Bible came from an infinite God then he should express PI exactly (and the Bible would be full of numbers). In fact he used men to express his word and to the men of that day three is a good approximation. If the author were an artisan then no doubt he would say that PI is three and a bit. We also understand that the rim was a handbreadth in thickness or about 7.4 cm. The cubit is 44.45 cm. If we use 10 as the diameter then the circumference should be 31.42. If we use 30 for the circumference then the diameter should be 9.548. Hebrew System qaneh (reed)=6 cubits=8 feet 9 inches (2.67 meters) ammah (cubit)=6 hand breadths=17.5 inches (44.45 centimeters) zeret (span)=1/2 cubit=8.75 inches (23.2 centimeters) topah or tepah (hand breadth)=1/6 cubit=2.9 inches (7.4 centimeters) esba (finger)=.73 inch (1.85 centimeters) (4 fingers=1 handbreadth) Gleason L. Archer, Jr. EBC Vol 1
2016-04-01 10:01:32 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Your answer is correct and your tutor is wrong. your tutor has used 22 / 7 as approximation for pi 's value where as more accurate approximation will be 355/113 which gives your answer.
2007-07-17 21:29:20 · answer #7 · answered by Venkateswara Rao K 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You are correct. The tutor probably took 22/7 and divided them. 22/7 is not pi (just an approximation).
2007-07-17 21:29:39 · answer #8 · answered by fastspawn 2 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Your tutor is way off base. To ten places, pi is 3.1415926535.
2007-07-17 21:25:35 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋
Obviously it's 3.14159265358979.......
If you *still* think pi=22/7 then look at this nifty proof
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof_that_22_over_7_exceeds_%CF%80
2007-07-17 23:34:54 · answer #10 · answered by Paul E 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋