| | :::: Then the measurement given is, quite simply, wrong. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 23:44, 11 March 2008 (EDT) | | :::: Then the measurement given is, quite simply, wrong. [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 23:44, 11 March 2008 (EDT) |
| | ::::: Huh? Okay, I'll have to spell it out for you. If (and this is not the only possible explanation) the ''actual'' diameter was 9.7 cubits, then the ''actual'' radius would be 30.47 cubits. If ''both'' of those figures are rounded to the nearest cubit, then the diameter would be listed as 10 cubits and the circumference would be listed as 30 cubits. And guess what! That's what the Bible lists them as! So if this is correct (and it doesn't have to be exactly that: it could be 9.6 cubits for example), then the Bible is perfectly accurate! ("Accurate" is a different thing to "precise", as Ed mentions below.) If you still aren't convinced, have a look at the links in the External Links section of the article, particularly the Math Forum one. In fact, don't reply here unless you first read the three links. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:03, 12 March 2008 (EDT) | | ::::: Huh? Okay, I'll have to spell it out for you. If (and this is not the only possible explanation) the ''actual'' diameter was 9.7 cubits, then the ''actual'' radius would be 30.47 cubits. If ''both'' of those figures are rounded to the nearest cubit, then the diameter would be listed as 10 cubits and the circumference would be listed as 30 cubits. And guess what! That's what the Bible lists them as! So if this is correct (and it doesn't have to be exactly that: it could be 9.6 cubits for example), then the Bible is perfectly accurate! ("Accurate" is a different thing to "precise", as Ed mentions below.) If you still aren't convinced, have a look at the links in the External Links section of the article, particularly the Math Forum one. In fact, don't reply here unless you first read the three links. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:03, 12 March 2008 (EDT) |
| | + | ::::::Yes. Rounding. I get it. It's impercise. If I say Ed is six feet tall, I'm wrong because he's not. If I say he's ''about'' six feet tall, I'm right, because he's just over six feet tall. Is that so hard to understand, Philip? [[User:Barikada|Barikada]] 10:06, 12 March 2008 (EDT) |
| | :::I took a few science courses in high school and college. You might be interested to learn about the difference between "[[accuracy]]" and "[[precision]]". (I probably should compare and contrast the two ideas in a proposed new article: [[accuracy and precision]].) | | :::I took a few science courses in high school and college. You might be interested to learn about the difference between "[[accuracy]]" and "[[precision]]". (I probably should compare and contrast the two ideas in a proposed new article: [[accuracy and precision]].) |