# Good Afternoon!!

I’m no mathematician, but when something happens only once in a lifetime, I figure could be worth paying attention to. From MassLive: Pi Day 2015: 3.141592653 comes around for 1st time in 100 years.

Pi Day is a holiday, not a federal one, mind you, that celebrates pi, the mathematical constant that’s calculated by dividing the circumference of a circle by its diameter.

This year, Pi Day (named for the first three numbers of the mathematical constant and first officially celebrated in 1988 in San Francisco) has special significance – at 53 seconds after 9:26 a.m. and p.m. (9:26:53), the date and the time will represent the first 10 digits of pi – 3.141592653 (some argue that 9:26:54 is a more accurate time, since the 11th digit is 5, so the 3 should be rounded up.)

So what is Pi anyway?

The concept of pi – essential in calculations ranging from classical geometry to the most advanced physics and cosmology – dates to Egyptian pyramid builders of the 26th century BC. The constant was first represented by the Greek letter in 1706.

Pi was calculated out to 2,576,980,377,524 decimal places on April 29, 2009 at theCenter for Computational Sciences at the University of Tsukuba in Japan. It took more than 29 hours and 13.5 terabytes of computer capacity.

According to the article, lots of colleges mark the day, and M.I.T. even times their acceptance letters to go out on Pi Day. And get this: Albert Einstein was born on March 14.

I’ll let a real math whiz explain why Pi is important. From The New Yorker:

Why Pi Matters, by Steven Strogatz.

Why do mathematicians care so much about pi? Is it some kind of weird circle fixation? Hardly. The beauty of pi, in part, is that it puts infinity within reach. Even young children get this. The digits of pi never end and never show a pattern. They go on forever, seemingly at random—except that they can’t possibly be random, because they embody the order inherent in a perfect circle. This tension between order and randomness is one of the most tantalizing aspects of pi.

Pi touches infinity in other ways. For example, there are astonishing formulas in which an endless procession of smaller and smaller numbers adds up to pi. One of the earliest such infinite series to be discovered says that pi equals four times the sum 1 – + – + – + ⋯. The appearance of this formula alone is cause for celebration. It connects all odd numbers to pi, thereby also linking number theory to circles and geometry. In this way, pi joins two seemingly separate mathematical universes, like a cosmic wormhole.

But there’s still more to pi. After all, other famous irrational numbers, like e (the base of natural logarithms) and the square root of two, bridge different areas of mathematics, and they, too, have never-ending, seemingly random sequences of digits.

What distinguishes pi from all other numbers is its connection to cycles. For those of us interested in the applications of mathematics to the real world, this makes pi indispensable. Whenever we think about rhythms—processes that repeat periodically, with a fixed tempo, like a pulsing heart or a planet orbiting the sun—we inevitably encounter pi. There it is in the formula for a Fourier series:

That series is an all-encompassing representation of any process, x(t), that repeats every T units of time. The building blocks of the formula are pi and the sine and cosine functions from trigonometry. Through the Fourier series, pi appears in the math that describes the gentle breathing of a baby and the circadian rhythms of sleep and wakefulness that govern our bodies. When structural engineers need to design buildings to withstand earthquakes, pi always shows up in their calculations. Pi is inescapable because cycles are the temporal cousins of circles; they are to time as circles are to space. Pi is at the heart of both.

For this reason, pi is intimately associated with waves, from the ebb and flow of the ocean’s tides to the electromagnetic waves that let us communicate wirelessly. At a deeper level, pi appears in both the statement of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle and the Schrödinger wave equation, which capture the fundamental behavior of atoms and subatomic particles. In short, pi is woven into our descriptions of the innermost workings of the universe.

From the Guardian: Pi Day 2015: meet the man who invented π, by Gareth Ffowc Roberts.

In 1706, William Jones – a self-taught mathematician and one of Anglesey’s most famous sons – published his seminal work, Synopsis palmariorum matheseos, roughly translated by Jonckers as A summary of achievements in mathematics.

It is a work of great historical interest because it is where the symbol π appears for the first time in scientific literature to denote the ratio of a circle’s circumference to its diameter.

Jones realised that the decimal 3.141592 … never ends and that it cannot be expressed precisely. “The exact proportion between the diameter and the circumference can never be expressed in numbers,” he wrote. That was why he recognised that it needed its own symbol to represent it.

It is thought that he chose π either because it is first letter of the word for periphery (περιφέρεια) or because it is the first letter of the word for perimeter (περίμετρος). (Or because of both).

The symbol π was popularised in 1737 by the Swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler (1707–83), but it wasn’t until as late as 1934 that the symbol was adopted universally. By now, π is instantly recognised by school pupils worldwide, but few know that its history can be traced back to a small village in the heart of Anglesey.

#### And now, sadly, we must move on from the sublime to the ridiculous, our pathetic corporate media and their sick obsession with Bill and Hillary Clinton.

We’re all sick and tired of being sick and tired of the media’s insane hatred of the Clintons, and Hillary isn’t even running yet. What is it that causes these pathetic excuses for reporters and editors to hate these two people so much? Under Bill Clinton the U.S. economy was strong and healthy, and times were good for the middle class.

Before Clinton, we went through eight years of “Reaganomics” that left us with huge economic problems and four years of Jimmy Carter malaise.  Since then the economy has been in a shambles. Since Clinton, the economy has only been good for the ultra-rich, and we’ve been mired in two wars in the Middle East, and Republicans are trying to get us involved in a third war with Iran.

What was so terrible about peace and prosperity that the media, the GOP, and the Emoprog libertarians just couldn’t tolerate and don’t want to repeat?

If you’re thinking there a huge double standard in the media coverage of the Clintons vs. Republicans who held the same positions, you’re not imagining things. Over at Media Matters, Eric Boehlert has published a series of great pieces on this disparity.

The Clintons And Another Media Guttural Roar

Offering up some advice to the political press corps as it prepares to cover the 2016 presidential campaign, New York Times columnist Frank Bruni recently stressed that reporters and pundits ought to take a deep breath when big stories broke; to not immediately promote stumbles and campaign missteps to be more urgent and damaging than they really are.

“We may wish certain snags were roadblocks and certain missteps collapses, because we think they should be or they’re sexier that way,” wrote Bruni.

That was in his February 28 column. Four days later Bruni abandoned his own advice.

Pouncing on the controversy surrounding which email account Hillary Clinton used while serving as secretary of state, Bruni tossed his counsel for caution to the wind and treated the email development as an instant game changer and even wondered if the revelation indicated Clinton had a political “death wish.”

But that fits the long-running pattern of the D.C. media’s Clinton treatment: Over-eager journalists hungry for scandal can’t even abide by the advice they dispensed four days prior. Or maybe Bruni simply meant that his advice of caution was supposed to apply only to Republican candidates. Because it’s certainly not being applied to Hillary and the email kerfuffle coverage.

Instead, “The media and politicos and Twitterati immediately responded with all the measured cautious skepticism we’ve come to expect in response to any implication of a Clinton Scandal,” noted Wonkette. “That is to say, none.”

Just look how the very excitable Ron Fournier at National Journal rushed in after the email story broke and announced Clinton should probably just forget about the whole running-for-president thing. Why preemptively abandon an historic run? Because she may reveal herself to be “seedy,” “sanctimonious,” “self-important,” and “slick.” This, after Fournier denounced Bill and Hillary Clinton two weeks ago for their “stupid” and “sleazy” actions.

Why can’t these people see how ridiculously over-the-top they are when it comes to Hillary and Bill? How do they treat similar behavior by Republicans? Boehlert reported on March 10:

Even for a Republican White House that was badly stumbling through George W. Bush’s sixth year in office, the revelation on April 12, 2007 was shocking. Responding to congressional demands for emails in connection with its investigation into the partisan firing of eight U.S. attorneys, the White House announced that as many asfive million emails, covering a two-year span, had been lost.

The emails had been run through private accounts controlled by the Republican National Committee and were only supposed to be used for dealing with non-administration political campaign work to avoid violating ethics laws. Yet congressional investigators already had evidence private emails had been used for government business, including to discuss the firing of one of the U.S. attorneys. The RNC accounts were used by 22 White House staffers, including then-Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove, who reportedly used his RNC email for 95 percent of his communications.

As the Washington Post reported, “Under federal law, the White House is required to maintain records, including e-mails, involving presidential decision- making and deliberations.” But suddenly millions of the private RNC emails had gone missing; emails that were seen as potentially crucial evidence by Congressional investigators.

The White House email story broke on a Wednesday. Yet on that Sunday’s Meet The Press, Face The Nation, and Fox News Sunday, the topic of millions of missing White House emails did not come up. At all. (The story did get covered on ABC’s This Week.)

By comparison, not only did every network Sunday news show this week cover the story about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton emails, but they were drowning in commentary. Between Meet the Press, Face The Nation, This Week, and Fox News Sunday, Clinton’s “email” or “emails” were referenced more than 100 times on the programs, according to Nexis transcripts. Talk about saturation coverage.

Indeed, the commentary for the last week truly has been relentless, with the Beltway press barely pausing to catch its breath before unloading yet another round of “analysis,” most of which provides little insight but does allow journalists to vent about the Clintons.

And what about Colin Powell? And what about announced presidential candidate Jeb Bush? Boehlert wrote on March 11:

As the press demands answers regarding which private emails Clinton handed over to the State Department and which ones she withheld because she deemed them to be personal in nature, many journalists fail to include relevant information about prominent Republicans who have engaged in similar use of private email accounts while in office, specifically former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

By omitting references to Powell and Bush and how they handled private emails while in office, the press robs news consumers of key information. It’s also material that deflates the overheated suspicions of a wide-ranging Clinton cover-up.

Appearing on ABCs This Week on Sunday, Powell was asked how he responded to the State Department request last year that all former secretaries hand over emails from their time in office. Powell confirmed that he had used private email while secretary but that he didn’t hand over any emails to the State Department because his private emails were all gone.

“I don’t have any to turn over,” he explained. “I did not keep a cache of them. I did not print them off. I do not have thousands of pages somewhere in my personal files.”  Powell’s revelation is important because it puts into perspective the email protocol of a former secretary of state. By his own account, Powell’s emails, unlike Clinton’s, include his regular communications with foreign dignitaries. What was he emailing them in the lead-up to the war in Iraq? We’ll never know.

To date however, both the New York Times and the Washington Post have largely downplayed references to the fact that Powell’s private, secretary of state emails are all gone.

We simply have no “Fourth Estate” any longer. The media simply reports whatever fits their “narratives” from the 1980s and 2008 and ignores everything that doesn’t fit.

#### I know there is much more happening today. What Saturday reads would you recommend?

1. bostonboomer says:

Bill Sher (a Hillary supporter) on Hillary’s press conference (at Politico, March 11)

Are We Ever Going to Get Hillary 3.0?
Once again she’s playing defense, this time over server-gate. When do we get some offense?

Hillary Clinton’s “two-server” press conference on Tuesday had elements of both, the personal confidence of Christie combined with the tinny sound bites reminiscent of Gore. She gave the assembled media nothing it wanted: namely, the private server in question. She left behind various threads for critics to pull—the implicit contention that she can decide what emails are deemed public and private, the claim that the server contains Bill Clinton emails when his people has said he doesn’t email, the defense that she wanted to carry one phone device when she recently said she had an iPhone and a Blackberry.
But the wry smile she flashed at times suggested she was not concerned with the predictable pushback to come. After all, this was not her first press conference, nor her first media frenzy. She has weathered impeachment. She has seen a losing Bob Dole shake his proverbial fist in 1996 and wail, “Where’s the outrage?” She has insulted Tammy Wynette, and lived to politick another day.
Hence her ability to forgo sweat. Without a smoking gun, or even a waft of smoke, the stonewall-the-server story can only last so long. There’s no actual scandal that Clinton is being alleged of covering up. (Few outside the conservative camp treat the thoroughly investigated Benghazi tragedy as a brewing scandal.) Reporters can keep asking to turn over the server, she can keep pledging privacy, and voters will likely get bored, if they aren’t already. She appears perfectly willing to wait the press out.

Maybe we’ll see more offense if she declares her candidacy?

2. dakinikat says:

Love the “Why Pi Matters” article. It is a fascinating number. Orderly, yet full of what appears to be chaos.

• RalphB says:

That was a great article!

• NW Luna says:

Yes, indeed!

3. RalphB says:

Happy Pi Day everyone! I still don’t think anyone outside a newsroom or some douchebro cares about the email thing. They should all get a life and STFU!

• bostonboomer says:

No, only the villagers care about the latest Clinton non-scandal.

• NW Luna says:

I have to keep reminding myself of the delightful talk I had with the veteran who said, basically, “they’re just after her because they’re afraid of strong Democrats.”

4. bostonboomer says:

Crooks & Liars on that horrible cartoon of Hillary lying dead under a giant cell phone.

Crush the Witch

And get this: Albert Einstein was born on March 14. – fitting, bb, thanks for that fact. Great post.

Hm, David Gergin is now comparing Hillary’s ’email’ problem as the same as the GOP Senator’s letter to Iran?? I am going back to watching no more US news channels.

** Gergen – sp.

• bostonboomer says:

David Gergen is the ultimate Villager. He’s clueless.

• Sweet Sue says:

Gergen is the big muckety muck at the Harvard Kennedy School.
“Nuff said.

• bostonboomer says:

Harvard really seems to be going over the right these days. Ugh.

6. bostonboomer says:

Amazing video of rescue of Utah toddler who survived her mom’s car crashing into a river. She hung upside down for a day or so, but she’s do okay now, apparently.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/14/us/utah-baby-submerged-car/

7. bostonboomer says:

But since he’s a Republican and not a Clinton, the media doesn’t care.

8. NW Luna says:

I love the pie / Pi photos and illustrations!

• bostonboomer says:

Me too. I’m glad you liked them.

9. List of X says:

Apparently, congressman Trey Gowdy, the ringleader of Hillary Clinton witch hunt, is using a private e-mail himself:
http://www.salon.com/2015/03/13/trey_gowdys_hillary_hypocrisy_why_hes_the_last_person_who_should_be_demanding_clintons_private_emails_partner/

• bostonboomer says:

LOL

He can’t help it. His mom and dad were cousins and his brain is defective.

10. Sweet Sue says:

Gergen is a big proponent of the “Best and Brightest” school of government that brought us Vietnam. The snobs that will never accept Bill and Hillary Clinton, despite their education, experience and achievements, because, “Darling, they’re just not our kind.”
I’d say what else they foisted on us, but I choose discretion.

• bostonboomer says:

Actually, here in MA both Clintons are extremely popular; and if JFK had lived, we never would have had Vietnam. He wasn’t very happy with the advisers who were pushing war.

11. Fannie says:

Oh, what bullshit, if they want to talk about who hurt Tammy Wynette, it sure the hell wasn’t Hillary. Try the man she married George Jones, who abused her and knocked her around because of his drug use. He was just one of many who she dated, married, and who she had to deal with in the music business, they were the ones abusing her. Tammy was too damn busy raising her children, and her sister’s children when Carol died from cancer. Hillary didn’t make it a lifelong issue with Hillary. She did however carry the scars of the men who did her wrong.

We ought to start our own little thing here, and find out just what has the wives of the republicans who are running for office, exactly what have they learned from Hillary? Plenty. Let us start talking about their wives, their spending habits, their education, their past lives. Let’s put the tune on those women for a change.

• bostonboomer says:

Good idea. I wonder how we could do that though? The media won’t cover them.