I’ve been trying it for nearly 3 ½ years, and it’s getting worse.
It's not getting worse you won't even try and consider the question, the question is answerable totally and completely in any backdrop but you want some BS generic answer and there isn't one.
I can answer your question in the GR/SR theory.
I can answer your question in the QM theory.
Paul even answered your question in his view.
The question is answerable but only within a backdrop of understanding and there are many answers to the question.
Not within a country mile.
We are back to mathematical infinities and their approximations.
And within the backdrop theory they are using the answer is correct and fine.
You want some sort of BS generic answer and there isn't one
What problems? The only problems with infinity arise because some people are unable, or unwilling, to acknowledge that mathematical infinities are approximations, and that there must be an infinity to which they approximate.
You are sort of on the track with the approximation issue but the problem is much deeper than you think.
Pi cause every bit of the same problem as infinity because it
recurses to infinity in decimal places.This is not rocket science here look the definitions up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_numberIrrational numbers are those real numbers that cannot be represented as terminating or repeating decimals.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repeating_decimalThe decimal representation of a number is said to be repeating if it becomes periodic (repeating its values at regular intervals) and the infinitely-repeated digit is not zero.The problem exists on literally infinity other numbers other than infinity as per the two types above they can't even be represented with normal numbers you have to invent special short-hands.
The issue is as you figured is how do you approximate the numbers and those approximations may be determined by other factors in a backdrop and may not even be valid under certain backdrops.
Pi is a classic for this because it is known to 100,000 decimal places but used in an engineering or space backdrop that precision is complete garbage and it may not even be close.
The most classic example of that is the representing circles on a grid. The actual value of pi that will give the correct answer on the grid depends on the ratio of the grid size to the radius of the circle there is no standard approximation. If you doubt the answer try drawing a circle on a 1 x 1 grid and then try a 2 x 2 grid
As I said all this stuff is known what you are trying to convert infinity, pi and all the irrationals to a computable number.
The problem is a computable number relies on the computable function of the system we are talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computable_function
=> Any definition, however, must make reference to some specific model of computation but all valid definitions yield the same class of functions.
=> Before the precise definition of computable function, mathematicians often used the informal term effectively calculable.That in a nutshell is your answer and unfortunately it's not simple like you want but it is the answer and all of this is has nothing to do with science and there is nothing special about infinity, infinite other numbers have the same issue
I guess if you still don't like the answer you should move the discussion to a more suitable forum because this is well outside anything to do with science.
