what is the way to built pai 3.14 using geometry constructions

What I submitted can be seen here. ]]> http://www.roadsignmath.com/united-states/new-jersey/buses-only/#comment-247 Randy Weiss Thu, 27 Dec 2007 23:19:01 +0000 http://www.roadsignmath.com/united-states/new-jersey/buses-only/#comment-247 Been a while since RSM has been active - I've been away even longer, sorry. This sign's math is pretty impressive - I don't want to slam it in any way...but can't resist the chance to ask for __RULE__ clarifications. We ran into trouble with loose rules before. 1> Think the very small print on signs is NOT eligible or necessary to make a sign "Add Up". The rule here is about what is 'intended' for the casual observer of the sign to see - not the fine print. Any such numbers should NOT be included in solutions, and can be hapilly ignored. 2> Fractions: we long ago decided (though I never voted on it) that all fractions and decimals are OUT. Think time related numerals should have a specific rule: either 8:45 is considered an 8 and a 45 (as in the way this sign was used), or it should be thought of as 8.75 hrs, and NOT allowed. 9:00 would be ok to use as a '9'. Actually, I think I prefer to have it used as this sign was used, as two distinct numbers, but we should have a vote or a decision or both. (long ago I had a sign rejected on this point, and I am still clutching on to that miffed feeling!) Been a while since RSM has been active - I’ve been away even longer, sorry.
This sign’s math is pretty impressive - I don’t want to slam it in any way…but can’t resist the chance to ask for __RULE__ clarifications. We ran into trouble with loose rules before.
1> Think the very small print on signs is NOT eligible or necessary to make a sign “Add Up”. The rule here is about what is ‘intended’ for the casual observer of the sign to see - not the fine print. Any such numbers should NOT be included in solutions, and can be hapilly ignored.
2> Fractions: we long ago decided (though I never voted on it) that all fractions and decimals are OUT. Think time related numerals should have a specific rule: either 8:45 is considered an 8 and a 45 (as in the way this sign was used), or it should be thought of as 8.75 hrs, and NOT allowed. 9:00 would be ok to use as a ‘9′. Actually, I think I prefer to have it used as this sign was used, as two distinct numbers, but we should have a vote or a decision or both. (long ago I had a sign rejected on this point, and I am still clutching on to that miffed feeling!) ]]> http://www.roadsignmath.com/rules/#comment-245 mathematrucker Sat, 27 Oct 2007 15:41:10 +0000 http://www.roadsignmath.com/rules/#comment-245 From a purely mathematical and aesthetic viewpoint my first impression of the math specifications is that they are both too liberal and too contrived, but on the other hand until I try out the game myself, I will have to assume they are appropriate. A different, simpler version of the game that springs to mind would be to restrict all allowable symbols to the ten digits, the four basic operations of arithmetic, the equals sign, and parentheses. A further simplification would be to disallow the use of any numbers greater than 9 by requiring all numbers to be broken down into their separate digits. I don't know, this last suggestion might be way too liberal. It gives rise to a potentially interesting and difficult (or even impossible) mathematical counting problem: For n > 1, given n randomly selected digits (not necessarily all distinct), what is the probability that they satisfy some equation of the above type? Another potentially interesting thing to look for would be long strings of consecutive valid signs occurring on a single stretch of roadway. Lastly, I don't think tautologies like "7 = 7" should be disallowed and I'd probably even allow signs with one digit, but again, I'm just guessing at this point...let me take a closer look at what's out there, with this newfound perspective in mind! From a purely mathematical and aesthetic viewpoint my first impression of the math specifications is that they are both too liberal and too contrived, but on the other hand until I try out the game myself, I will have to assume they are appropriate.

A different, simpler version of the game that springs to mind would be to restrict all allowable symbols to the ten digits, the four basic operations of arithmetic, the equals sign, and parentheses. A further simplification would be to disallow the use of any numbers greater than 9 by requiring all numbers to be broken down into their separate digits.

I don’t know, this last suggestion might be way too liberal. It gives rise to a potentially interesting and difficult (or even impossible) mathematical counting problem: For n > 1, given n randomly selected digits (not necessarily all distinct), what is the probability that they satisfy some equation of the above type?

Another potentially interesting thing to look for would be long strings of consecutive valid signs occurring on a single stretch of roadway.

Lastly, I don’t think tautologies like “7 = 7″ should be disallowed and I’d probably even allow signs with one digit, but again, I’m just guessing at this point…let me take a closer look at what’s out there, with this newfound perspective in mind!