Re: Loss of Mars Climate Orbiter due to units of measurment conf

[Bryce Bardin <bbardin@home.com>]

Keith Thompson wrote:
> 
> gisle@lunde.ii.uib.no (Gisle S�lensminde) writes:
> [...]
> > Even worse. In according to an old Norwegian translation of Guinness
> > book of records, they decided it to be exactly equal 4.0 The record was
> > "the most unprecise estimate of pi". I don't have the book at hand now,
> > so I can't give further details.
> 
> This is *way* off-topic, but you can find more information in Petr
> Beckmann's book "A History of pi".  In 1897, "A bill introducing
> a new Mathematical truth" was introduced in the Indiana House of
> Representatives.  The bill was full of internal contradictions;
> one could conclude from the first paragraph that pi = 16/sqrt(3), or
> about 9.2376.  After going through the committees on Swamp Lands and
> Education, the House passed the bill 67-0.  Fortunately, a mathematics
> professor happened to be visiting the state Senate on the day the
> bill came up for debate there (after going through the Committee
> on Temperance).  On his recommendation, further consideration of the
> bill was postponed indefinitely.  It hasn't been on the agenda since.
> 
> --
> Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst@cts.com  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
> San Diego Supercomputer Center           <*>  <http://www.sdsc.edu/~kst>
> "Oh my gosh!  You are SO ahead of your time!" -- anon.

The full story is reported on the following web page:
  http://www.acc.umu.se/~olletg/pi/indiana.html

It says in part:

   "The bill implies four different values for pi and one for sqrt(2),
as
   follows: pi' =3D 16/sqrt(3), 2 sqrt(5 pi/6), 16 sqrt(2)/7, 16/5 (
9.24 ,
   3.236 , 3.232 , 3.2 respectively.) sqrt(2)' =3D 10/7."

(I was quoted the "16/5" value by many of my colleagues when I was on
the
Physics faculty of Indiana University.)

P.S.  Keith, by the way, what is that I see in one of your e-mail
addresses 
about Shavian "fish" nets?