## False claims

An enlightening discussion about pi and tau.

### False claims

I noticed that the Pi Manifesto made a few claims which were completely false:
• It claims that the tau version of Euler's identity comes "trivially" from the pi version by squaring both sides, but this is just a blatant lie. In reality, both versions comes from Euler's formula, and I could just as easily argue that the pi version comes trivially from squaring the eta version.
• The claim that tauists are "dismissed as cranks" is false. In reality, there are professional mathematicians advocating for tau, and those who aren't don't think the idea is crazy; they just don't care.
• The Pi Manifesto claims that just because one engineer supports pi that all engineers are against tau.
• The Pi Manifesto claims that comparing area of a circle to physics formulas means that we are forgetting about its connection to circles, but in reality, the area of a circle formula comes from integrating τr with respect to r, and those physics formulas also come from integration, so the connection is perfectly valid, and the context of circles is not lost.
• The claim that the 2 doesn't belong with the pi in the normal distribution is completely untrue. The only justification given for that was "oh look, I can rearrange the formula so that the 2 is next to σ^2 so it must belong there." In reality, the two next to the σ^2 in the exponent comes from the definition of a Gaussian function, and the sqrt(τσ^2) comes from normalizing the function. You also conveniently forgot to mention what σ^2 is equal to in the alternate suggestions. In the first alternate suggestion, pi only shows up because you set σ^2=1/2. In the second suggestion σ^2=1/τ.
• The Pi Manifesto claims that squaring the circle is possible. It isn't.
τ>π
1=0
Mathlete

Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:01 am

### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Fatal: Not able to open ./cache/data_global.php