Pi is wrong!

I’m still rummaging through my copy of Where Mathematics Comes From, reveling in each revolutionary detail. It represents such an upheaval in my understanding of math, I started feeling more free to question basic mathematical concepts. Lately I’ve been wondering about the mystical value of Pi. Why do we divide a circle’s circumference by its diameter for our fundamental value, and not by the radius? To me, the radius seems like the most essential property of circle. (Inspired to look for essences by a rejection of Platonism is pleasantly ironic, no?) Or at least, the most convenient. This would yield 2Pi (6.28…) as the fundamental value, and considered as an angle would represent a full turn of a circle instead of half. The idea has been churning in the back of my head, and today I was surprised to find an article by a mathematician who agrees!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.