RE: [asa] Pi in Bible's face

Yes, that seems quite plausible, James.

I wonder just how important the circumference to diameter ratio was to them
back then. I assume small round objects (eg. bowls) made of malleable
material could simply be pounded enough until they became acceptably round.
I would think that even the huge, massive bowls of 1 Kings could be made
round by using several techniques to assure roundness, even if made by
casting. What makes the value of pi so important in the case for in 1
Kings, I think, in this case is some means to place those two rows of 300
knops (10 per cubit). By simply deducting the two hand widths from the 10
cubit diameter, we now have a 30 cubit circumference that makes the symmetry
work so much nicer. This should allow them to place the knops correctly on
the first try with only minor adjustments, if any, thereafter.

On a more teleological approach, this account seems useful in demonstrating
that a cynical view of scripture is unmerited, thus greater merit is due at
least this biblical account. Perhaps this was intended by the One who gives
scripture its inspiration. [ Of course, I favor this subjective view since I
am on the team that seems to be on the winning side of this issue. J In
the one science forum I have argued this, I've yet to have anyone counter
this mathematical argument.]

Coope

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of James Patterson
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 7:01 AM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: RE: [asa] Pi in Bible's face

> I'm guessing, by the way, that there are certain parts of the anatomy
which are always in certain proportions

> - and by tweaking the formula one can get pretty close to PI on a
frequent basis?

Just to add a bit more to this (and you may have covered this but I'm too
lazy to go back and look), both diet and genetics may have had a role. You
would need to measure these distances on a Jew from several millennia back.
I'm sure we are taller than the average person of that age. A given race
typically has a given body habitus, with of course variability, but the Jews
of that time probably didn't intermarry much. Their diet was much leaner.

All of that might get you an extra 0.02. J Do we have any of Jewish
descent in this bunch?

James Patterson, Shreveport

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of George Cooper
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2008 3:17 PM
To: ASA
Subject: Re: [asa] Pi in Bible's face

Thanks for the measurement fun, Murray.

Your diet may be a factor. Do you eat many vegemite sandwiches?

Nevertheless, 3.12 should be good enough for government work. :)

Coope

----- Original Message ----
From: Murray Hogg <muzhogg@netspace.net.au>
To: ASA <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 6:37:38 PM
Subject: Re: [asa] Pi in Bible's face

Hi George,

Oh, says he - I always thought the zero was significant because of the
potential difference between 30 and 31 (say). Is this not so?

Anyhoo, having goofed off a little...

Measurement of arm from elbow to finger-tip, c =
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(wait for it)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
ONE CUBIT (ROTFL!)

Being much more serious

c = 500 mm

h = 95 mm

my PI = 3 / (1 - (h/5c) )
= 3 / (1 - (95/2500) )
= 3 / 1 - 0.038
= 3 / 0.962
= 3.1185

Do we have some sort of chart we can look up to work out what this means - I
have suggested a few entries below;

Your PI;

<0 - your ruler has inches AND centimeters - how nice!

0-1 - Please Google "forearm" to make sure you are using your correct bodily
parts

3 - Biblical fundamentalist

3.1185 - You should be so perfect!

3.14 - Liar

3.14159265 - Really BAD liar

3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628
62089986280348253421170679
 
8214808651328230664709384460955058223172535940812848111745028410270193852110
555964462294895493038196
 
4428810975665933446128475648233786783165271201909145648566923460348610454326
648213393607260249141273
 
7245870066063155881748815209209628292540917153643678925903600113305305488204
66521384146951941511609...(etc)
- Anatomically perfect but at best obsessive compulsive - possibly bordering
on the mentally deranged.

I'm guessing, by the way, that there are certain parts of the anatomy which
are always in certain proportions - and by tweaking the formula one can get
pretty close to PI on a frequent basis?

Blessings,
Murray

George Cooper wrote:
> Hi Murray,
>
> First, on David's observation: it strikes me as valuable to think in
> terms of significant figures and/or likely precision of measurement and
> applaud your observation on this point BUT we should be applying these
> concepts to the measurements given (diameter=10 cubits; circumference=30
> cubits) rather than the implied value of Pi. Clearly these measurements
> are to two significant figures.
>
> Actually, the numbers 10 and 30 have a significant figure of one sense
> zeros are not considered "significant" by definition.
>
> I like your thinking, though I still like the beauty of the formulation.
>
> If you, or anyone, finds the time to goof-off with this a little, I
> would be curious to learn the following measurements of your arm. [I
> happened to choose my right arm.]
>
> Place your forearm vertically on a table and measure from the table top
> (elbow) to the tip of your middle finger (also vertical). [Cubit value,
c.]
>
> Place your hand flat on the table and measure across your hand about an
> inch behind the knuckles, as well as, across the knuckles. [Hand values,
h.]
>
> It would be interesting how close we might come to a pi value. [Your pi
> = 3/(1-(h/5c)) ]
>
> "Coope"
>
> I note, furthermore, that the Old Testament only ever gives measurements
> to the nearest half-cubit and only then when the measurements are small
> - the largest measurement with a half-cubit accuracy is two and a
> half-cubits.
>
> SO it strikes me that the precision being used is +/- half a cubit.
>
> We can say, then, that the diameter should be taken as 10 +/- half a
> cubit (i.e. 10.6 cubits would be taken as 11 cubits) and circumference
> as 30 +/- half a cubit.
>
> So, calculating maximum and minimum possible values of Pi;
>
> Maximum value = largest possible circumference / smallest possible
diameter
>
> = 30.5 / 9.5
>
> = 3.21
>
> Minimum value = smallest possible circumference / largest possible
diameter
>
> = 29.5 / 10.5
>
> = 2.81
>
> So, by and large following David's lead we find that the nearest we can
> calculate PI from the OT data is to state a range of 2.81 to 3.21
>
> Even if one wanted to round these to two significant figures, the actual
> value of PI would still be within range.
>
> Blessings,
>
> Murray
>
> George Cooper wrote:
>
>> David said: Pi is 3-to one significant digit, which is all the text
gives.
>
>>
>
>> Yes, a fair point given a general audience with the author giving only
>
>> approximate dimensions for either the diameter or circumference or both.
>
>>
>
>> I would have preferred, however, to read in scripture of an "about 3 to
>
>> 1" statement considering all the other subsequent details of these
>
>> magnificent bowls. On the other hand, the placement of the 600 knops
>
>> would benefit greatly if the craftsmen could take advantage of this
>
>> rather unique measurement circumstance of reducing the diameter of 10
>
>> cubits by the two hand widths, yielding a ~ 3.14 ratio (assuming the
>
>> circumference under the brim were actually 30 cubits). This makes me
>
>> suspect that the 3 to 1 statement had a nifty meaning, especially for
>
>> the craftsmen.
>
>>
>
>> Whether a rough value or a unique circumstance for measurements, either
>
>> gives reason for none to claim the Bible uses an "exact value of 3 for
>
>> pi". I've heard this claim used by those in science who should know or
>
>> suspect better. [I'll be curious if they publish my brief and friendly
>
>> response in the next/ Astronomy/ issue.]
>
>>
>
>> "Coope"
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
>
>> Behalf Of David Campbell
>
>> Sent: Friday, October 10, 2008 2:58 PM
>
>> To: ASA
>
>> Subject: Re: [asa] Pi in Bible's face
>
>>
>
>> Pi is 3-to one significant digit, which is all the text gives.
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> --
>
>>
>
>> Dr. David Campbell
>
>>
>
>> 425 Scientific Collections
>
>>
>
>> University of Alabama
>
>>
>
>> "I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"
>
>>
>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>
>>
>
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Oct 13 12:49:20 2008