The Christian Science Monitor published a editorial today touching on a fundamental tasks of academic computing - understanding numbers.
Pi's presumed infinite nature has absorbed mathematicians - and others - for centuries. According to "That Book...of Perfectly Useless Information," newly published, actress Melissa Joan Hart can actually recite pi from memory to 400 decimal places - not quite as good as a modern computer, which can take pi to more than 200 billion digits, but it's still pretty impressive.
But students young and old might not be aware of news generated by physicists at Purdue University that suggests pi, or 3.14159...., might not be as truly random as once believed.
The scientists just completed a study (published in the latest issue of the International Journal of Modern Physics) comparing pi's "randomness" to that produced by some 30 different machines that generate random numbers. Though they found that the sequences derived from pi are an acceptable source of randomness (a big factor in producing hard-to-decrypt code, or solving particular physics problems), pi's string doesn't produce that randomness quite as effectively as the machines. Call it a case of deus ex machina.
For now, pi's integrity appears safe. "We do not believe these results imply anything about a pattern existing in pi's number set," says Ephraim Fischbach, a Purdue physics professor.
The Monitor's View, Humble Pie, The Christian Science Monitor, April 29, 2005. http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0429/p08s03-comv.html
Purdue University News, Pi seems a good random number generator – but not always the best, April 26, 2005. http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/2005/050426.Fischbach.pi.html
Spotted by GCD's Brain, Math Tidbits.
No comments:
Post a Comment