Re: Pi

On Tue, 23 Nov 2004 22:33:33 -0000 "Michael Roberts"
<michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk> writes:
> I just knew David would put his oar in, and I hope he understands my
> English
> idiom!
>
> I am cynical about stories like pi as there are so many urban
> legends
> masquerading as history of science. Last week I had to gently squash
> a
> student in church history who said many in the past thought God put
> fossils
> in the rocks to deceive people. Vidler who wrote the worst church
> history
> ever said that Gosse said that which is bunkum. He then cited
> Inherit the
> Wind and was taken aback when I said it was fiction! A few
> well-placed
> snippets about the trial sufficed.
>
> I am afraid I simply dont accept most historical stories unless I
> can
> substantiate them or read them in scholars whose work I find
> reliable. I am
> afraid that is what 30 years of chasing us the history of science
> and
> religion has done to me!!
>
> It all goes back to Andrew White's work of fiction A History of the
> Warfare
> of Science with Theology. Also now we are getting lots of popular
> history of
> science, much of a fictitious nature.
>
> Not totally cynical
>
> Michael
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "D. F. Siemens, Jr." <dfsiemensjr@juno.com>

> > Bill No. 246, Indiana State Legislature, 1897, was introduced
> January 19,
> > 1897. It was sent to committee, First Canals then Education. The
> State
> > Superintendent of Education was all for it. It came up for second
> reading
> > February 5. Rules were unanimously suspended to allow a third
> reading and
> > immediate passage. It was read in the Senate February 11 and
> referred to
> > the Committee on Temperance. Professor C. A. Waldo (of Indiana
> > University, if I recall correctly) happened to come by on February
> 12 and
> > was properly shocked. As a consequence, the bill was postponed
> > indefinitely.
> >
> > The author of the value of pi was E. J. Goodwin, M.D., of
> Solitude,
> > IN--far southwest corner of the state. I have read the bill and
> cannot
> > decide what the value of pi was supposed to be. Waldo wrote that
> the
> > value was both 4 and 3.2. His memoir is "What Might have Been,"
> > _Proceedings of the Indiana Academy of Science_, 26:445f (1916).
> It seems
> > to be inaccurate in some places. The text of the bill is in Will
> E.
> > Edington, "House Bill No. 246, Indiana State Legislature, 1897,"
> _ibid._
> > 45:206-210 (1935).
> >
> > An apparently more complete reference is in "Rules for Making Pi
> > Digestible" in the Contributors' Club, _Atlantic Monthly_,
> 156;118f (July
> > 1935). I have not read it. Edward J. Goodwin's paper on one aspect
> of the
> > subject, "Quadrature of the Circle," is in _American Mathematical
> > Monthly_,1:246f (July 1894).
> >
> > Lancelot Hogben, _Mathematics for the Millions_, (3rd ed; Norton,
> 1951)
> > p. 255, has a multiply mistaken claim.
> > Dave
> >
What's the matter, Michael? Aren't the _Proceedings_ of a colonial
academy of science adequate evidence for you? I found them when I was
studying at Indiana State many years ago.

I am familiar with the imperial gallon, an obvious case one
one-upsmanship--not just royal, imperial. I think it can only be said
while wearing a monacle.
Dave
Received on Tue Nov 23 23:48:28 2004