3rd powering any number typically is considered to give us a XYZ/cartesian volume of 3D space. Pi^3 = 31.00 62 7..... The above = 3D( XYZ/cartesian ) Pi and may associate with the 31 great/equaltorial circle-like planes of regular/symmetrical icosa(20)hedron, . Pi^4 = 97.40 90 91 03 40 02 43 72 36 44 03 32 68 87 05 The above here may associate with a sort of Pi-time i.e. XYZ + time. If we divide pi-time into 4 equal parts/vectors we get the following; 24.35 22 7 27 58 50 0609309110083172176. H,mm interesting that here again we observe a #7 occurring at the 7th integer place/position as we do in Pi^3. I now take notice of the FSConstant( below ) having a #7 at the third integer place/position and 6th place/position. 0.00 7 29 735 2569 8 If gave merit to one place or positon on the rational side, even tho it is zero, that 2nd #7 would be in the 7th integer place/position also. 31.00 62 7..STOP i.e. go no further into irrational infinity 24.35 22 7...STOP i.e. go no further into irrational infinity In other threads I've given other numerical interesting associations with 31, 00 and 7. Here above tho I was more focused on any significance or relevance of pi^4 = time? Are we to believe that all seemingly cosmic coincidences are just that, or is there a possibility that some seemingly cosmic coincidences are more than just a coincidence? Why cannot there not exist underlying network of spacetime interrelationships, that we cannot ever observe, yet have phenomena and paradoxes that we do not seemingly have an answer for be related to unknown and nonobservable network? r6

"irrational infinity" is what you get when you move a non-math discussion of digits from [thread=134837]Free Thoughts[/thread] to here.

7734 = Hell? Write 7734 NOW turn what you wrote upside down!!!?!?!?!?! Coincidence??? I think not!!! Ooooh this is really cool, huh?Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I'd like to address that point. There's a concept in mathematics called a normal number. A normal number is a real number that has the property that its decimal digits are statistically random. [For now let me keep this simple by sticking with base 10. In general a number might be normal in one base but not another; or perhaps even normal in all bases. I don't want to deal with any of this. For this discussion, "normal number" means normal in base 10.] By statistically random, I mean that each finite string of digits appears equally often. And finally, in case anyone says, "Well there are infinitely many decimal digits so how can you possibly talk about things happening equally often to other things?" And the answer to that is that we will calculate our percentages by taking the frequency of each string within the first n digits; then we'll take the limit as n goes to infinity. The details aren't important but I want you to know that they thought of that and dealt with it. So if x = .43068435823058340584893720934p8959328749380759348853...(random digits forever)... then if it happens to be the case that the string "1" occurs 1/10 of the time; and the string "47" occurs 1/100 of the time; and the string "123" occurs 1/1000 of the time ... in other words there is no pattern and not even the slightest bit of statistical bias in the distribution of the digits ... then we call x "normal." Now here is what you need to know about normal numbers. * There are a lotta lotta lot of them. "Almost all" real numbers are normal; in the sense that if you picked a completely random real number, it's virtually certain that you'd pick a normal number. So there are lots of normal numbers. They're very common. * If a number is normal, then in fact it does actually encode every life story, every movie, every photograph, every novel, every song that ever has or ever could be created. You just pick an encoding scheme -- jpeg for photos, ASCII for text, etc. Then any novel or photo or song or even the exact second-by-second story of your own true personal life -- is encoded as a string of digits. And that string of digits definitely exists in infinitely many normal numbers! * So this is on the one hand, seemingly cosmic. But it is in actual fact completely trivial and meaningless. It's just a function of the crazy math games you can play with infinite sets, combined with the definitions we made up about statistical properties. Mathematicians don't generally think this has anything to do with the real world. You can't show me a real number in the physical world. Because of measurement error, you can't even show me a real number in the physical world in classical Newtonian physics, let alone modern relativity and quantum theory ... which are still after 100 years of the smartest people in the world working on the problem, still totally incompatible with each other! No physicist has any right to be arrogant, it's clear that whatever the "true" physics is, we're probably hundreds of years from having a clue. * Pi is suspected to be but has never been proven to be a normal number. If it is, it contains lots of secret messages. If not, some other real number does. I don't care. Let's say pi is normal. The problem is that it contains every possible message. It's like saying that there's a secret magic word in the dictionary that reveals the meaning of life. And I'm handing you this precious gift. I give you the dictionary. The problem is that the dictionary contains every word. So you have no way of knowing which word is the magic word. This is a terrible way to give someone a secret message. You give them the message buried in a flood of other messages. They have no way to know which message you're sending them. Conclusion: It's all coincidences. If you wanted to you could probably find the entire illustrated text of Moby Dick and the schematics for the next iPhone in the digits of pi. It's meaningless, just something interesting to talk about and then forget about. You see, if the Great Cosmic Source was trying to send us a secret coded message via the digits of pi, they did a very poor job of it. They encoded everything pretty much everywhere. There's no message in there at all; or more accurately: There's every message. So even if someone's sending us a message, they did it in such a way that we can't read it. We can't tell what's important from what's not, because every possible combination is in the digits of pretty much every real number. The answer to your question is: Yes there are lots of messages in pi. They're all random. The number of nerves in your spine is in there and so is every other number that's not the number of nerves in your spine. Whether there's a Cosmic Message Sender or not; it makes no difference since you can't tell the signal from the noise.

until along comes someone with has a fascination with certain types of noise and wallah! we have a coincidence of note... a sign, a revelation.. yet it is still only noise.... ahh such is the life of a numerologist:m:

Some types of fireflies have this synchronous flashing feature. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photinus_carolinus for an example. Sometimes things seem mysterious simply because we they are outside of our experience or understanding.

Specialized Sycnhrnoistic Fireflies( Thx ) Thx Chezsle, I had no idea existed. My other example was clocks of clock shop which I have not experineced so only going on what somelse( Fuller? ) stated. No other odd or seemingly rare phenomena of such sycnchroniscity come to mind. Entrainment is or may be diffifferent phenomena. The cosmic question still remains tho, is it possible there are cosmically relevant oddities or synchronicities--- numerical, geometrical, math etc --- that exist, yet we may only think it is conincidence? I can't thing of any historical such cases. Historically what comes to mind is those inventions that were discovered by accident in laboratory or job site, where scientist or whomever, notices something that was not part of the normal operating procedures yet something useful is discovered. r6

I did not know about the fireflies either but thought there might be good explanation. It seems that the glowing is a means to attract mates and so there is competition. So if one bug sees another bug flash, it could be a good idea for it to flash too. This could lead to a synchronization. Here is a video that shows how pendulum clocks on a shelf can synchronize. I saw a similar experiment performed in science class long ago. If the clocks you were talking about were not all on the same shelf or otherwise coupled I don't know but suspect that there is a good explanation. This video has gone out of its way to make the coupling as direct as possible so that they sync quickly. [video=youtube;yysnkY4WHyM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yysnkY4WHyM[/video]

Clock Shop Same level Clocks Thx again Cheezle. I'm nearly out of Gigs on my monthly allowance, so have to be carefull with utubes etc...... Again, I only have the story of clocks in clock shop. If true, then the question is does synchronisticit happen with clocks on various different shelves? This all info that I have not thought about in years, so have not done any internet searches to find out more. Thx to you wer getting a clearer understanding. Clocks in some of those older clock shosp may have worked on springs not pendulum's but then again, if many of the older type clocks are based on pendulum and or springs, then your utube may clearly explain. I'm curious to know what if anything else you find. r6

I don't believe this is regarded as true. Nobody (except maybe a few diehards) believes that the latest theory is the final cosmic law. Of course many physicists believe they are capable of eventually finding the "Truth with a capital T" truth about the universe. "Dreams of a Final Theory" is the name of a popular physics book a while back. I don't believe there will ever be a final theory. But even if there is a final theory "out there," nobody believes that we've found it yet. For one thing, we have no unified theory that integrates quantum physics and relativity." So we know that what we have is a historically contingent best current approximation. Newton's theory was a great approximation and now we have relativistic effects and a mathematical structure called spacetime. A hundred years from now we'll have another refinement. Nobody thinks these are the exact final answer to how the universe works. Newton himself recognized this point. When he published his theory of gravity he was criticized for merely showing how gravity behaved, without providing an underlying explanation for what gravity actually was. Newton was a smart guy and well understood this point. He famously said: "I frame no hypotheses." (Actually he said "Hypotheses non fingo," which translates as either I frame no hypotheses or I feign no hypotheses. Either meaning supports the point). Science does not say why there's gravity. It says how gravity behaves if you study it closely. If the Higgs particle is responsible for gravity, then why are there Higgs particles and why do they have the properties they do? Science does not study metaphysics! Science is a historically contingent process of measurement and theory building that evolves over time and never stops changing. It gets better and better as we build better instruments. But everything in science is subject to physical verification and theory refinement. Anyway too many words as usual. tldr version: Nobody thinks the current laws of science are the ultimate Truth about the universe. On the contrary, our beliefs about the universe have always been historically contingent and always will be.

4 Vectors of Pi^4 minus 1 vector Pi^4 = 97.40 90 91 03 40 02 43 72 36 44 03 32 68 87 05 The above 97 divided into 4 equal parts/vectors/elements/factors as XYZ and time ergo each has value of 24.35 22 72 75 85. In this way XYZ and t are all treated as equally valid values. I then subtracted the above 24.3 from 97.4 and arrived at 73.056819. No specific reason for doing that other than curiousity and I got a resultant that is exactly equal to the sum-total of 87 primary great/equaltorial circle planes - 14 of those planes that are congruent to each other. There exist seven primary axis sets--- 3, 4, 6, 6, 10, 12, 15 --and because the icosa(20)hedron has a left and right skew set of 31 GrCP's we get 87 primary great circles instead of the original 56( 25 + 31 ) only. Here is a link as follows to help explain that this latter above. http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s11/figs/f3201b.html X = 24.35 22 72 75 85... Y = 24.35 22 72 75 85... Z = 24.35 22 72 75 85... t = 24.35 22 72 75 85.... Pi^4 = 97.40 90 91 03... Pi^3 = 31.00 62 7...... FSConstant = .007 29 73 52 56 In the latter FSC we find 73 at 7th and integer place/position if we do not give any merit to rational side of zero. I also notice in doing some 137 calculations that we get a repeating pattern ergo this concept goes back to #7 if I recall correctly, causing this in other scenarios also. 0.00729927007299270072992700729927 Phi does this also in regards to #89 but #7 does not divide equally into 89 so that basis for repeating pattern does not appear to be related to 37. Repeating patterns are anther way of saying STOP here, go no further into infinite irrationality, is my best guess. r6

3, 4, 6, 6, 10, 12, 15 = 56 = 7 * 8 + 31 = 87 - 14 = 73 6, 10, 15 = 5-fold symmetry set of 31 GrCP's 3, 4, 6, 12, = 3 and 4-fold set of 25 GrCP's 3......4......6.......6......10......12.....15 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ......(4).....................10..............15 .........................................12........ (6)..............6........6........................... ........4.....................(4).................. 3...............(6).................................. Here above I've isolated them here somewhat into respective catagories i.e. 10 and 15 both five(phi ) related to icosa(20)hedron The first (4) is because the 10 GrCP's actually are congruent with the 4-fold's 4 GrCP's so the shorter radius icosas 10 GrCPP's defining 5 sets of 4 overlapping GrCPP's. See following link to understand this latter congrency set above. http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/Lynn/LynnS54.html Next we 12 GrCP's by themselves. Next 4-fold and 5-fold set of 6 GrCP's. See 3 GrCP's below why there is (6) in this line. Next 4 and the 2nd (4) but here again related back to the 5-fold 10 GrCP's. Finally 3 GrCP's that define the octa(8)hedron, and the octahedron has a unique double affect or feature i.e. it takes 6 GrCP's to create the 3 GrCP's of the octahedron. When jitterbugging VE/ cubo-octahedron transforms to a octahedron its 12 edges are doubled as 24. There examples of octahedral doubling that cannot recall off hand. 6 is most common numerical/GrCP set then 4. r6

@rr6, What your theories lack is the ability to made predictions. If you can look at the digits of pi and tell me what tomorrow's stock prices or sports scores will be ... then I'll pay attention. But if all you have is back-correlations -- "the first two nonzero digits to the right of the decimal point in the decimal representation of pi^3 are 62 ... and the human spine has 62 nerves attached to it" -- then you haven't got anything. Because as I already explained, you can find anything and everything in the digits of pi. You can find the Bible and the plans for the next iPhone. You can find the life history of everyone who ever lived, who might have lived, who didn't live. Everything is in there by virtue of the mathematical properties of normal numbers. It's just a logic game. Nobody thinks there are real numbers in the physical universe. But another argument against your and QQ's brand of pi mysticism, is that other cultures might just as easily have chosen tau = 2pi as the important number. 6.28-something. As you know from the lighthearted "Tau Manifesto" floating around the Internet, tau is a much more natural unit. For example, 1/4 of the way around the circle is tau/4. One-third of the way around is tau/3. It's very simple. Pi is clearly the wrong unit because 1/4 of the way around the circle is pi/2. It's confusing to everyone. I always have to stop and remember that 1/4 rotation is pi/2. Or why not pi/4? Or 4pi? They would do just as well. So really there's a whole family of numbers that are small fractional multiples of pi that would do just as well to characterize the perfect circle, as QQ seems to think. But then you make a really bad leap of logic and you try to find significance in the decimal representation of pi. But a real number's representation in base 10 is completely arbitrary. It's historically and culturally contingent. In computers we prefer variants of binary notation, with special floating point representations for numbers intended to model real numbers. You could do it in base 47 or base 6. You could consider the continued fraction approximation, which is a way of representing real numbers that's much more interesting than decimals. In other words even if there were some cosmic significance to the number pi; it's doubtful that this significance would be revealed to us via the digits of the base-10 representation. When I think of pi I think of the number defined by pi = 4 * (1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + 1/9 - 1/11 ...) Now that is cosmic! [Note -- if you happen to try this one at home with your favorite programming language, you will find that the convergence is incredibly slow. It takes 700 billion or so terms to get the first 12 decimal places. Personally I find the slow convergence really amazing.]

There is nothing mystical about Pi... What gave you the impression I thought there was? It doesn't matter what language or numerical base you wish to work from Pi is Pi

Truncated Powerings of Pi--Finite Yet Eternal---2nd law of Thermodynamics---- Someguy, I believe it lacks more than just that above. However, your or others observations to date, do not take away from the rationally logical set of factual givens--- Pi^3 as volumetric and Pi^4 inclusion of a time vector ---the rationally logical arrived at conclusions from those many associations--- physics/nature associations ---I may not have listed in this thread but have listed elsewhere ex see this thread at following link for more correlations; http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?134837-Pi-3-31-00-62-7-7-integers C,mon someguy, you can't arrive at that answer with many of our known cosmic/generalized laws/principles etc....your being to silly now Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! See the thread I link to above for more indepth set of correlations. When you want to show me as many correlations to complex humans and other cosmic mathematically related facts, as I have done with stated rational logic for the pathways I followed--- volumetric and time powerings ---then share such. Your throwing out a number with little none of the cosmic correlations I have given for Pi powering. Any base can be converted over to another base. That we are using this base does not change the facts or the associations that I offer as possible clues of true cosmic connection between Pi powers and truncation of Pi powerings to a finite set. You want to keep going on about how much can be found in infinite Pi. Forget infinity and focus on just a much more simpler finite set that I have offerred with all of the correlations I have offered if not more yet to be found. So you believe, yet that in no way discounts what I've found an offered for others to consider. See the thread I linked to above for more complete set of corrrelations, In this thread I was more focused on Pi^4 for the first time and it has slightly differrent set of angles to consider. Again, SGuy, you have given little to nothing in the way of cosmic associations that I give with Pi^3 and ^4. Tho again, more complete set of correlations are in the other thread I link to above. If and when you have a seemingly cosmic list of correlations that amounts to something, or comes close to my list as associated with Pi^3 and ^4 please share and compare or share so we can compare. many of not all of my given correlations also associate with the cosmic three and only three, symmetrical/regular, stable polyhedrons of Universe. Are they in base 10 Someguy? I feel, that, I'm investigating a hybrid, cross-breeding diversity of various special-case languages, that involve powers of Pi, geometry, linear mathematics, prime numbers--- I discovered a quasi-orderly pattern of prime numbers and it also correlates ---what I believe is a more complex set that correlate to and ultra-micro, gravitational spacetime i.e.; I believe, that, I've discovered some very abstract--- if not the most abstract ---cosmic connections to static set of patterns, that correlate to non-dynamic ergo conceptually static, and perhaps (w)holistic mapping of 5-fold gravitational spacetime from which constains the 4-fold and 3-fold symmetries and asymmetries, and from which stem--- can be deduced ---all other greater fold symmetries and asymmetries ex 6-fold, 7-fold 8-fold etc....... SGuy, you appear to not believe in finite set of conceptually abstract, cosmic/generalized ergo inviolate laws/principles, in eternal complementation to a finite physical/energy Universe. This latter, for beginners, may be one of many beliefs we disagree on, tho perhaps some parts we do agree on, as I various ideas/concepts into the same sentence. r6

Mr. rr6, while moving along, I stumble upon this thread. First off, Mr. rpenner made a very valid point. Since you seem to "run off", after telling other posters to "move along,Troll", I thought that, perhaps, you "ran off" before reading my "moving along" post in your "Free Thoughts" posting. Moving Along r = 18th letter of alphabet r + r + 6 = 42 rr6 = 42 reciprocal of 31 = 13 13 = 7 + 6 7 x 6 = 42 Even really Dumb, insignificant, bandwidth wasting Trolls can manipulate simple numbers. Zero (0), in most numbers, is a placeholder indicating no value. m = 13th letter of alphabet r = 18th letter of alphabet m + r = mr. 13 + 18 = 31 ! mr. + rr6 = Mr. rr6 m + r + r + r + 6 == 73 ( prime # ?!!) reciprocal of 73 = 37 ( prime # ?!!) 73 + 37 = 110 1 1 0 = 11 and place holder remove placeholder from 110 = 11 11 + 31 = 42 ?!! ERGO - even an insignificant bandwidth wasting troll, with a confirmed, ( by Mr. rr6 ) value of EVEN LESS than 0 can Mathematically Prove in a few equations that MR. rr6 is an example of a Prime _________. Would fail to matter 1 iota what is placed in blank area, Mr. rr6, are you ready to handle THAT? just moving along