Thanks

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

Thanks,Father Beast.

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by Civ Pi(3.14)Fan
Thanks,Father Beast.

Civ=pi CivII=pi*d CivCTP=pi*r^2 CivIII=4/3pi*r^3 (hopefully)
Civ pi= It's coming
P.S. pi=(about)3.14159

couple of comments and questions.
in my own book, it's more like:
civ= 2piR, the circumfrence of a circle.
civ2= piR^2, the area of a circle
hopefully civ3 will = 4piR^2, the area of the surface of a sphere. I think that 4/3piR^3, the volume of a sphere, may be too much to hope for. maybe for civ4...

I notice you put CTP as between civ2 and civ3. how do you rate CTP2?
Come to think of it, where does AC fit into your circular world?

[The Andy-Man]

Do you 2 ever go out or breathe without a list of mathematical rubbish bulking up your brains?

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
Do you 2 ever go out or breathe without a list of mathematical rubbish bulking up your brains?

Ahh, but it makes life so much more beautiful. imagine breathing in the air while understanding the composition of it, and what causes the pressure!

But mathematics aside, surely you can see the flexibility inherent in the expansion from circle to sphere. We just happen to know the formulae because it interests us.

[Masis]

Father Beast, you sound like the right person to ask this question...

I was playtesting the Age of Osman scenario when I got this error message during the first turn...
What do you think is going on?

[The Andy-Man]

i useed to be good at sceinece and starting thinking of every thing as little bits of strings.

This then started to confuse my already crusty brain. So i had to stop.

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
Do you 2 ever go out or breathe without a list of mathematical rubbish bulking up your brains?

Ah, but it is Mathmatics that rules the world. The chance of a phalanx sucessfully attacking a fortified riflemen is almost (but not quite) zero is because of math . Everything in the game is math. From combat to research to prodution, everything os determined by math. Also like what what Father Beast said:

But mathematics aside, surely you can see the flexibility inherent in the expansion from circle to sphere. We just happen to know the formulae because it interests us.

Originally posted by Father Beast
...hopefully civ3 will = 4piR^2, the area of the surface of a sphere. I think that 4/3piR^3, the volume of a sphere, may be too much to hope for. maybe for civ4...

You're probally right, but you should always dream. Anyway, I haven't played CTP 2 so I couldn't grade it and SMAC is pi*2r (the same as Civ II)

[The Andy-Man]

well, i have news for you, i can mathmaticaly proove (i think) that maths cannopt exsist and that there is no occourence that is impossible....

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

well, i have news for you, i can mathmaticaly proove (i think) that maths cannopt exsist and that there is no occourence that is impossible....

How can you mathmaticly prove that math cannot exsist? If math does not exsist, you cannot mathmaticaly prove it, because math would have to exsist to mathmaticaly prove that it does not.And if you do mathmaticaly prove it then you could not have possibly prove it, so your threoy is void. Also, yes in the game no occorance is impossible, some are just very, very, very unlikly.

[Father Beast]

Actually, civpi, I think that if you could come up with a mathematical proof that mathematics was inconsistent, then mathematics would have to go out the window because it would be self cancelling. the proof would be meaningless only if math itself is meaningless. so by including the possibility for that proof within its framework, mathematics itself becomes meaningless.

(Whew!)

of course, the proof would have to stay within the boundaries. Not blatantly defy them like in the classic algebraic sequence which starts:
a=b
and later on has you divide both sides by
a-b
which would of course be zero, and ends by "proving" that
1=2.
all through the illegal divide by zero function.

Hey Andy
Different strokes, eh? as I sit here I read about superstrings while waiting for the pages at Apolyton to load (takes about a minute for each one)

Another day I would be perusing the AC manual, or civ2, or CTP, etc.

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

Yes, but math does exsist even though there are some confusing (and facinating) inconsitances like the one you mentioned, for example I could prove that zero * infinity = 1 or 2 or 3 or any other number you wish. Therefore every number = every other number becase if a=b & b=c then a=c. Cool, eh?

[Ari Rahikkala]

Yes, which is why x/0 = undefined.

On the other hand, pi holds, with 100% possibility, every finite series of numbers inside it. Somewhere in pi are the whole Apolyton forums... Just after the genetic codes of all of the world's people. After which is, curiously enough, ten billion times (in ASCII) the message "Abolish post counts!".

It's in there somewhere !

[The Andy-Man]

to prove maths is meaningless (lets see if i can put this down)

in maths, 1+1=2

but can we mathmatically proove that 1+1=2? we are told that it is so, but it is not proovable for maths is a network of theories bassed on numbers. Numbers are just characters or symbols on bits of paper. Therefore, it cannot be MATHMATICALY prooved that 1+1=2. Hence, the most basic math principles are meaningless.

If this is so, nothing can be immpossible for there is no mathmatical way to deem it impossible.

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

Say you have one apple and a friend gives you another one apple, so count one apple, two apple, so 1+1=2

[The Andy-Man]

but can you mathmaticaly proove there are 2 apples?

putting 2 apples next to eachother in no way constitutes as mathmatical proof of 1+1.

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by The Andy-Man
to prove maths is meaningless (lets see if i can put this down)

in maths, 1+1=2

but can we mathmatically proove that 1+1=2? we are told that it is so, but it is not proovable for maths is a network of theories bassed on numbers. Numbers are just characters or symbols on bits of paper. Therefore, it cannot be MATHMATICALY prooved that 1+1=2. Hence, the most basic math principles are meaningless.

If this is so, nothing can be immpossible for there is no mathmatical way to deem it impossible.

OK, a mathematicians book was published around 1920 which set out to make the very proofs you speak of. I'm not sure of the title, but it is a very large book. I'm told that by page 187, they have manged to prove that 1+1=2.
The proof is out there.
just because it may be a bit beyond you.
nevertheless, the proof is a practical unneccessity. Mathematics works for every situation we have put it against. Archimedes principles are classic examples

[The Andy-Man]

but how monay people have read this book?

i can still dazzle half drunk middle aged people at dinner parties :P:P

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

As Father Beast said many proofs are very complicated, and some truly cannot be proven, for example the only way to prove that a+b=b+a is to try every possible values for a and b which is impossible because there are infinate possible values, but it is genally acepted as true. The same is true for a+(b+c)=(a+b)+c and ab=ba, etc.

[The Andy-Man]

so, has anybody neem watching big brother?

[EOL]

Most of these things are rules/definitions used for the everyday maths people use. Everyday in so much as for matrices ab=ba isn't usually true, work in base 2 and then 1+1=10. You're welcome to create your own branch of maths with your own rules if these aren't good enough for you. Maybe it will catch on or find some use in some bizarre abstract theories.

[The Andy-Man]

well, i invented 2 new '0's.

a posotive, a negative and a nuetral :P

multi play anything by 0+ the ansrwe will be a positive zreo and vica vercsa. The nutral is the for when a photon meets an anti-photon :P:P

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

Orginally posted by EOL
Most of these things are rules/definitions used for the everyday maths people use. Everyday in so much as for matrices ab=ba isn't usually true, work in base 2 and then 1+1=10

First of all ab always equels ba (ab means a*b, and vice versa). Also no matter what base you use the rules are the same. The 1st digit=base^0(always 1), 2nd digit=base^1,...nth digit=base^(n-1). So if you change all of those numbers in base two to base 10 the answer is the same. 1(base 2)+1(base 2)=10 (base 2)
= = =
1(base 10)+1(base 10)=2(base 10)
In other words 10(base 2)=2(base 10)
Also no base is really more logical than another, the only reason we use base 10, is because we have a total of ten digits(fingers+thumbs) on our hands.

[Father Beast]

Anyway, getting back to the subject...

I figure civ1 as 2piR, because it was very linear. almost no customization at all was available. we had to hack saved game files to make "scenarios", which were very limited

I figure civ2 as piR^2 because it allows a great deal of freedom of movement and customization in some ways, and is still very flat in other ways.

AC is kind of like a civ2 mod, but I begin to see the circle bulge, just a little.

I hope civ3 is 4piR^2 for obvious reasons. nuff said.


Andz, sorry Andy, half drunk middle aged people is your limit. you're not dazzling us.

[The Andy-Man]

maybve if i still like maths i would.


but middle aged drunk people is the only people i get to show off to

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Originally posted by Civ Pi(3.14)Fan

Also no base is really more logical than another, the only reason we use base 10, is because we have a total of ten digits(fingers+thumbs) on our hands.

Indeed, many languages belie the use of base 12 or 16 or other numbers before literacy became common, when base 10 became even more convenient.

ex: English, our fine forum language, uses one thru twelve, thirteen (three and ten), fourteen (four and ten), etc. Bigger numbers were telled with other terms - score, gross, etc. Perfectly logical and useful if used regularly.

[Marquis de Sodaq]

Also, mathemeticians of yore have invented alternative geometries that are perfectly logical and internally consistent. Old Euclid still reigns, of course, but his geometry is not the only possible one.

[Civ Pi(3.14)Fan]

I agree with you on that one Father Beast. Even though I think SMAC and Civ II are the same, in terms of this scale. They both have diffrent pluses and minius. Also, ancient Babylonion used a base 60 numbering system(imagine having to remember 59(they had no digit for 0) digits instead of 10)