sorry, wrong, there is a FINITE number of FINITE Sequences
IF that statement were true (it's not).. what is the largest finite sequence? You can't name it... because I'll just add one more number to it. The set is INFINITE.
And it's actually possible that some infinite sets of numbers are larger than other infinite sets of numbers. For example, the set of irrational numbers (which is infinite) is larger than the set of rational numbers (but the set of rational numbers is ALSO infinite). There are also more real numbers than natural numbers.
I am admittedly not a mathematician, but you may wish to review the work of Georg Cantor.
You are assuming a distribution within an infinite sequence that may not exist. As a previous commenter pointed out, an infinite sequence of non-repeating numbers could completely omit the number 9 and then would not contain ANY finite sequence that had a 9 in it.
Pi may very well contain every finite sequence, but you have certainly not proven it. I do encourage you to continue to try -- if you succeed, there may be practical applications in cryptography or other areas of math.
I will leave it to professional mathematicians to critique your future publications....
Despite the insults, you have not proven your assertion. Non-repeating infinite strings of numbers do not necessarily contain every finite sequence of numbers. A simple example: there could be an infinitely long string of numbers that NEVER contained the sequence 1234567890. Perhaps pi does or does not contain that sequence, but there are an infinite number of finite sequences -- it's difficult to really know.
If you can prove it, by all means, post your solution here!
Citation needed. Just because you have an infinitely long string of non-repeating numbers, it doesn't necessarily mean that every sequence possible is contained in that string. Perhaps it is true that every irrational number has this property but I don't think it's been proven.
not sure where "Organic matter degrades over time unless it's part of a living organism" comes from... because it's not entirely true. Some organic matter is quite stable, depending on the conditions, and it doesn't "need" to be part of a living cell. This is why we can recover DNA from (dead) fossils that is tens of thousands of years old... and why DNA is a reasonably good choice for molecular storage.
These finning bans actually require fishing vessels to capture whole sharks and bring them back to ports before removing their fins -- which makes the economics of shark fins unfavorable due to the size of the sharks and the low market value for the rest of the shark's meat.
So the solution is genetically engineered sharks that can re-grow their fins in a shark farm... and maybe stick some lasers on their heads for fun.
from the article:
"So far, project researchers have sequenced the genomes of 1,092 people from 14 populations in Europe, East Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and the Americas. Ultimately, they will study more than 2,500 individuals from 26 populations."
So somewhere between 1,092 and 2,500... perhaps I should have said "up to 2,500"....
"This study brought to you by the Correlation Is Not Causation Foundation." -- That sentence was my way of saying this study was specifically designed to demonstrate that statistics are misinterpreted....
You can try to find correlations between almost any two variables, but it doesn't mean there's any kind of causation relationship between them.... and there's definitely no causation relationship between chocolate consumption and winning a Nobel prize.
Hmm. Sorry about that Ophelia. I hate videos that play automatically, too. But I changed my browser settings so that I have to manually allow Flash to run, and that has prevented me from seeing this annoyance....
I didn't mean to suggest any of these developments are necessarily bad. Technology that produces better tools can be used in both good and bad ways, but it's generally better to have more technology than less....
We just have to be careful about how we use the technological marvels we build.