I am wrong in thinking the circumference or the diameter of a circle has to be rational?

  • JoBo@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    No, they don’t have to be rational. It’s counter-intuitive but you can accurately draw a line with an irrational length, even though you can’t ever finish writing that length down.

    The simplest example is a right-angled triangle with two side equal to 1. The hypotenuse is of length root 2, also an irrational number but you can still draw it.

    • Twoafros@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Thanks for the answer. I’m confident you’re correct but I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around drawing a line with an irrational length. If we did draw a right angled triangle with two sides equal to 1cm and we measured the hypotenuse physically with a ruler, how would we measure a never ending number? How would we able to keep measuring as the numbers after the decimal point keep going forever but the physical line itself is finite?

      • JoBo@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        Irrational numbers can be rounded to whatever degree of accuracy you demand (or your measuring instrument allows). They’re not infinite, it just requires an infinite number of decimal places to write down the exact number. They’re known to be within two definite values, one rounded down and one rounded up at however many decimal places you calculate.

      • Moobythegoldensock@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        In the real world, you’re measuring with significant figures.

        You draw a 1 cm line with a ruler. But it’s not really 1 cm. It’s 0.9998 cm, or 1.0001, or whatever. The accuracy will get better if you have a better ruler: if it goes down to mm you’ll be more accurate than if you only measure in cm, and even better if you have a nm ruler and magnification to see where the lines are.

        When you go to measure the hypotenuse, the math answer for a unit 1 side triangle is 1.414213562373095… . However, your ruler can’t measure that far. It might measure 1.4 cm, or 1.41, or maybe even 1.414, but you’d need a ruler with infinite resolution to get the math answer.

        Let’s say your ruler can measure millimeters. You’d measure your sides as 1.00 cm, 1.00 cm, and 1.41 cm (the last digit is the visual estimate beyond the mm scoring.) Because that’s the best your ruler can measure in the real world.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          And this comes up in some fields like surveying. The tools are relatively precise, but not enough to be completely accurate in closing a loop of measurements. Because of the known error, there is a hierarchy of things to measure from as continual measurements can lead to small errors becoming large.

        • Klear@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          I used to think that “1 + 1 = 3 for high enough values of 1” was a joke until I realised it’s actually true when it comes to real-world measurements.