This Fact Keeps Me Up At Night

🙏Support me by becoming a channel member!

Disclaimer: This video is for entertainment purposes only and should not be considered academic. Though all information is provided in good faith, no warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, is made with regards to the accuracy, validity, reliability, consistency, adequacy, or completeness of this information.

#math #brithemathguy #pi

[BriTheMathGuy]

🎓Become a Math Master With My Intro To Proofs Course! (FREE ON YOUTUBE)

[brucelavoie]

Engineer's approximation: e = pi = sqrt(10) = 3 +5%/-10% Good enough for estimating purposes.

[FAVYSM]

Nah, gotta stick with 22/7. It's way more accurate.

To be precise:
sqrt(2)+sqrt(3) is off by around 0.15%
22/7 is off by only 0.04%

[aweebthatlovesmath]

≈ ≠ =
(Proximating doesn't equals to equals)
LOL

[TheWingAnthony]

this was how the digits of pi was approximated centuries ago. divide the polygons into polygons with even more sides and you get an even better approximation. then they stopped once Newton came around with his discoveries, I believe

[Fytrzaczek]

This approximation is pretty good. The error is less than 0.15%. You should place that in the vid, also remove the clickbaity equal sign from thumbnail. Nonetheless, nice one

[tumak]

Why the equal sign in the title of this video presentation?? It should be a squiggly "equal" sign. Cheers

[mostafaelmassoud]

La dernière implication est tirée par les cheveux

[GlorifiedTruth]

I love it when I pause the video, do the math, and then see that I did it right without inserting 50 careless errors. To find the side length of the polygon, I used the radius of the circle to create a 30/60/90 triangle within it and went from there, arriving at the same answer.

[adrianolubini]

And the number e is approximately the sum of the cubic roots of 2 and 3

[bdharral]

Not the first to say this, but it's more interesting to me that 22/7 is a better approximation than sqrt(2) + sqrt(3); it's even more interesting to me that 355/113 is ridiculously close to pi.

[DeJay]

Using irrational numbers to approximate a transcendental number.
Sure, why not

[adandap]

One minor nitpick: just because a shape is enclosed within another one it doesn't follow that its perimeter is less. In the case of a square inside a circle it's true, but imagine a many pointed star inside the circle - by taking more and more points we can make its perimeter arbitrarily large.

[DetCoAnimeFan]

Hahaha, that way
SquareRoot(10) = pi
pi^2 = g(acceleration due to gravity)

[Kokurorokuko]

I'll have to dislike this video because you have the equals sign in the thumbnail

UPD: he changed it. I removed the dislike.

[GameInOne]

Me preparing for chemistry exam
Him :- makes hexagon
Me :- confused screaming

[chiranjiviupreti]

Interesting. But your video thumbnail is misleading.

Edit - March 8, 2022: For people wondering, originally the video thumbnail had √2 + √3 = π, which is now changed to √2 + √3 ≈ π.

[sal]

I'm sorry, but at 2:19, a < b < c does NOT in general imply that b ≈ (a+c)/2 (usually not the case). Take e.g. a=-100, b=-99 and c=100 (so a < b < c holds) - then (a+c)/2 = 0, but 0 !≈ -99, not even close. Even an example with small values like ours, with 2sqrt(2) < pi < 2sqrt(3), all we can really conclude for sure is that pi is between 2.828 and 3.464, the true value could be skewed towards either side. It's just a coincidence here that the mean of the two is somewhat close to pi.

[joshuak.n]

What's there in this to keep you up at night bro

[brucelavoie]

Another estimation: "Rule of 72", take annual rate of return in %. Divide 72 by this number, this yields the approximate number of years it will take to double your money. 12% yield -> 72/12=6 years. works best near 8%. There is one point where it is exact. Left to the reader to figure out. The obvious failure shows up that at 72% yield you should double your money in a year which contradicts the 72% yield.