this post was submitted on 20 Jun 2024
271 points (90.0% liked)

Science Memes

11081 readers
2656 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)

Right, by my point is that your accuracy and precision are the same whether you are making a 1 meter length object or a π meter length object. Your meter stick is not accurate to the width of a hydrogen atom, either.

But if we accept the precision of our manufacturing capabilities as "close enough," then it is equally as close to exactly π as it is to exactly 1.

In other words, to say we cannot make an object that is π meters is to say we cannot make an object that is any specific length.

[–] mexicancartel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 months ago (6 children)

The precision of our manufacturing capabilities might be limited as QM has this discreete nature. It might be limited in this universe. So pi may only exist theoretically

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (5 children)

But you could make that same argument for a lot of fractions. 1/3 doesn't exist because you cannot divide a quantum in three. 0.333 repeating means that eventually you have to divide an indivisible foundational particle in thirds.

[–] rbits@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If you have three particles, 1/3 of that is one particle. No need to divide an indivisible particle.

[–] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

But if I don't have three particles, 1/3 requires division.

[–] rbits@lemm.ee 3 points 5 months ago

Right, but you can have exactly a third of some group of particles. You can't have exactly pi of some group of particles I think is what they were saying

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)