Calculation of an Approximation to Pi
Pi is irrational and transcendental (that is, it cannot be
calculated to a finite value). It is possible however to represent Pi using mathematical
models, generally geometric in origin and often resolving into an infinite
series or a repeated loop spiraling into infinity. Such methods would require an infinite number of
steps to provide a finite solution, however they make it possible to calculate
an approximate value for Pi, the accuracy of which is limited only by the time and patience applied to the
problem. Each step must be calculated to the degree of accuracy required for the
solution and in the absence of modern tools (calculators and computers) only a
limited number of decimal places could be obtained. Over the millennia
results have been obtained with increasing accuracy and with the advantage of
modern technology a Japanese team, Tamura and Kanada, obtained Pi to almost 17
million decimal places. The method was based on Gauss's study of the
arithmetic and geometric mean of two numbers and made use of a super computer (with
multiple processors).
'The Penguin Dictionary of Curious and
Interesting Numbers' (by David Wells) devotes several pages to the history of
attempts to evaluate Pi. Reading this made me wonder what could be achieved using
a desktop computer. Microsoft Excel lends itself to repeated calculations so carrying out the exercise in a
spreadsheet would reduce the amount of manual effort involved.
I reasoned that a circle could be defined as a uniform polygon with an infinite
number of sides. As the number of sides tends towards infinity the length of the
sides tends to zero and the periphery of the polygon tends towards the
circumference of a circle. (Sounds a bit like Calculus?). My method began with a
polygon of known periphery, a hexagon. Equating this to a circle gives Pi = 3. I inserted this in the
top row of the worksheet as starting data and used Pythagoras to calculate the data for a twelve
sided polygon in the next row. Dragging the formulae down the table, doubling
the number of sides each row, I obtained
Pi to 14 decimal places in the 23rd row. (Result confirmed by Tamura and Kanada's published
figures). Since Excel is limited to 15 significant figures that was the best
result I could get. I consoled myself with the thought that the best
mathematicians in the world had struggled for centuries to achieve that degree
of accuracy.
I then repeated the exercise using the Gaussian method favoured by T and K. This achieved the same result in row 4 !

