Oh, the pull is strong.
Well, the “five most important” numbers (most important? hmmm) is indeed a felicitous result of a deeper truth that is not destroyed by tau. But doesn’t relying on that argument undermine the whole purpose of tau-ism – that is, that tau somehow represents a neater and more pleasing notation? It seems a bit like the argument for the UK switching to drive on the right… it’s logical to standardise with the rest of the world but the in this case the rest of the world aren’t tauists, so why bother? (Yes, I know you’re going to say tau and pi can co-exists during the transition, where by contrast allowing people to drive on either side of the road would be… inadvisable.) It is fascinating to see how you can make what might seem to be a radical change from pi to tau (at least, it’s radical given how wedded we are to pi) and observe the underlying mathematics unaffected by it. A nice little experiment, but having seen that, do we still need to go through with it?
On reading in more detail your manifesto the one truly persuasive argument for me is the “pi is a pedagogical disaster” line in 2.1. Though actually 2.2 is quite convincing too. And if that weren’t enough, there’s a proof by association with Matt Groening (okay, that’s a very cool video).
It’s almost midnight here in the UK, tau day is nearly over. I did my best to #savepi, but you can’t lie in the path of progress.
I am converted.