Now another way of arriving at pi by construction other than laying a chain around the quartercircle measure the length distance then multiply by 4 and finally compare to diameter to arrive at pi. A second method would be a 10 by 10 Grid of 100 small
squares with circle inscribed. Here we know the square is 100 square units. We figure out approx how many squares in the 4 corners and it is approx 5.375. When we multiply that by 4 we have 21.5 square units, meaning the circle has 78.5 square units.

Now we suppose that area of square of 100 relates to area of circle 78.5 as perimeter of square 4, relates to circumference of circle unknown U?

So we have

100/78.5 :: 4/U

78.5 (4) = 100U

314 = 100U

Hence pi is 3.14.

If this were Ancient Greek times, it would be a toss up as to whether a geometer can have a better grid of 10 by 10 or a chain that can be accurately laid over the quartercircle and the ruler to measure it.

I do not know what pen or pencil tool they had in Ancient Greek times to draw a nice straight line to make a graph grid of 10 by 10.

And then, well, I tried a blade of grass today over the quarter circle and it worked beautifully, where I can snip the one end with my fingernail and it straightens out for length measurement on a graduated ruler. This works far better than a thin wire
or a chain. So I am certain this is the fastest most accurate way of arriving at 3.1 but is it 3.14, or 3.13 or 3.15.

As for pure mathematics arriving at pi, the best is square root of 10, for that needs no geometry drawing or pictures at all. Just the simple computation of square root of 10.

I am certain that pi is connected to square root of 10.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 1:43:32 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

Now another way of arriving at pi by construction other than laying a chain around the quartercircle measure the length distance then multiply by 4 and finally compare to diameter to arrive at pi. A second method would be a 10 by 10 Grid of 100 small

squares with circle inscribed. Here we know the square is 100 square units. We figure out approx how many squares in the 4 corners and it is approx 5.375. When we multiply that by 4 we have 21.5 square units, meaning the circle has 78.5 square units.

Now we suppose that area of square of 100 relates to area of circle 78.5 as perimeter of square 4, relates to circumference of circle unknown U?

So we have

100/78.5 :: 4/U

78.5 (4) = 100U

314 = 100U

Hence pi is 3.14.

If this were Ancient Greek times, it would be a toss up as to whether a geometer can have a better grid of 10 by 10 or a chain that can be accurately laid over the quartercircle and the ruler to measure it.

I do not know what pen or pencil tool they had in Ancient Greek times to draw a nice straight line to make a graph grid of 10 by 10.

And then, well, I tried a blade of grass today over the quarter circle and it worked beautifully, where I can snip the one end with my fingernail and it straightens out for length measurement on a graduated ruler. This works far better than a thin wire

or a chain. So I am certain this is the fastest most accurate way of arriving at 3.1 but is it 3.14, or 3.13 or 3.15.

As for pure mathematics arriving at pi, the best is square root of 10, for that needs no geometry drawing or pictures at all. Just the simple computation of square root of 10.

I am certain that pi is connected to square root of 10.

And I do know what that connection is, and I know it all, except, except for the critical point-- I do not know why it is such.

In Physics we have speed of light and it is a constant speed in meters/second and we have the entire EM Spectrum with visible light band in the center and to far right we have UV then X-rays then gamma rays. To left of Visible we have Infrared (heat and
temperature) and microwave and radio.

And I do not know about you but I have become sick and tired of dopes and fools who blair out hate for speed of light a constant, for these nagging tworps and fools can easily see that if Light varies in speed you no longer have an EM Spectrum. The EM
Spectrum is the easiest proof for the nattering nutters who hate a constant speed of light.

A constant speed of light is the same as a constant of a Diameter times a number that makes for the circumference of circle, regardless of the size of the circle.

Perhaps when we explain to a kook of science that a constant speed of light is no different than a constant ratio that is pi for circles. But most kooks are insane and nothing will pull them out of the abyss they are in.

So, well, here I have Physics EM Spectrum and I have another idea that is ingrained in Physics, probability in the Schrodinger Equation called Psi^2.

And the way to explain Psi^2, at least by me at the moment is to explain it as a probability of finding a particle in a given area.

So we have a particle moving in Space at meters/second, and its force is meters/seconds^2 and its energy is mass*(meters^2/seconds^2)

Schrodinger Wave Equation is about the inverses. So we have seconds/meters instead of speed meters/seconds. We have Angular Momentum of mass(meters^2/seconds) and we have for waves seconds/meters^2 and also the reversal of energy seconds^2/meters^2.

Pi in pure geometry is about a particle.

But Pi can have a Wave nature which is a Psi^2 and to find this number we need 3.162277... rather than 3.14159....

The best philosophy I can put on this situation at the moment is that the world is a duality of electric versus magnetic and in switching from one to the other we lose or gain this tiny difference of 3.162-3.141 = 0.021.

This number 0.021 is a conversion factor that is lost or gained when particle goes to wave or vice versa.

It probably defines Sigma Error in Quantum Mechanics and all of Physics.

For 3.16/3.14 = 0.6%

Any sigma error of 0.6% or below then we are talking of equality. And Sigma Error above 0.6% means sloppy experiment.

So at this moment in time, I see Pi as having 2 values. Perhaps a first in math history that a constant has two different values.

And I believe the value of 3.16 is the prefered value for it is so crucial to bounce between 3.16 and the whole numbers of 1 or 10 in scientific notation.

Now the infinity borderline is based on pi as 3.14.... but I have to check and review what happens if we use 3.16.... Whether it has three zero digits in a row at the 604 place value and one zero at the 1208 place value. Last time I looked at this, the 3.
16... had three zeroes in a row as far earlier than 604 place value.

This is an exciting book, and the most major advancement of the number pi since my long lost reincarnated cousin of Archimedes in Ancient Greek Syracusa.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

So the mystery of pi-- what Old Math called -- transcendental is no longer really a mystery at all, for there are TWO numbers that act like pi, one of which is very much algebraic-- the square root of 10.

And why does mathematics require for one number to be in fact TWO numbers? It is because physics has quantum duality, meaning that something is both particle and wave simultaneously. The difference between 3.162... and 3.141... is a miniscule difference
of 0.021... In fact there are many many prefix numbers digits of important physics constants-- especially Magnetic Flux Quantum, and weak mixing angle (although we ignore the Standard Model b.s.), Electron g-factor (really the Dirac magnetic monopole g-
factor) and the Muon-g-factor, the Rydberg unit of energy.

Why does mathematics need at least One number that is represented by TWO Numbers? It is because of physics duality demands one number of mathematics define the Sigma Error contained within mathematics. Pi as both 3.16... and 3.14... sets the standard for
equality in mathematics as sigma error of 3.16/3.14 = 0.6%. If in physics experiments, the outcome is 0.6% or less you have equality of concepts. If more, then you do not have equality of concepts.

For the layperson in all of this, can be summarized as that geometry needs a sigma error, for a line is of length and no width and no depth. But, that means a contradiction for a line has to have some width some depth to exist. In steps our 0.021 factor
in that a Line in Geometry has at least a 0.021 factor of width and depth in order to exist.

Now, I worked on Infinity Borderline for pi as 3.14.... some decades in the past from this date 12Aug2023, ignoring square root of 10. So now, since pi is actually TWO numbers acting as one, I need to see what the infinity borderline is for 3.16... For 3.
14... where pi has its first three zero digits in a row at 10^-604 place value is the infinity borderline and its algebraic completeness at 10^-1208. Both of these spots is evenly divisible by 5! and in fact 10^-1208 is evenly divisible by 6! as one
computer read-out claimed (needs further verification)

So for 3.16... I need to see if 10^-604 and 10^-1208 are evenly divisible by both 5!= 120 and 6! = 720. Why 5! you ask? Because at infinity we need the existence of smooth polyhedra and polygons in geometry.

Now immediately I recognize there is a "9" digit for 3.16... in the 10^-604 spot so I know it is not evenly divisible there by 5! or 6!. However in the Algebraic Completeness of Infinity borderline there is a "0" digit and a good chance it is evenly
divisible by both 120 and 720.



Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
3:58 AM 12Aug2023



to Plutonium Atom Universe

3.
16227766016837933199889354443271853371955513932521 68268575048527925944386392382213442481083793002951 87347284152840055148548856030453880014690519596700 15390334492165717925994065915015347411333948412408 53169295770904715764610443692578790620378086099418 28371711548406328552999118596824564203326961604691 31433612894979189026652954361267617878135006138818 62785804636831349524780311437693346719738195131856 78403231241795402218308045872844614600253577579702 82864402902440797789603454398916334922265261206779 26516760310484366977937569261557205003698949094694 21850007358348844643882731109289109042348054235653 40390727401978654372593964172600130699000095578446

31096267906944183361301813028945417033158077316263 86395193793704654765220632063686587197822049312426 05345411160935697982813245229700079888352375958532 85792513629646865114976752171234595592380393756251 25369855194955325099947038843990336466165470647234 99979613234340302185705218783667634578951073298287 51579452157716521396263244383990184845609357626020 31676804240795894693424781414580651430453325889714 46769311137592404705077018546043927212835894192143 79843263432294100698417738335607269111071255492745 61841707758654442076025678341820374148294554615347 20993410591702356226115911404732754291627011270301



AP
Archimedes Plutonium's profile photo
Archimedes Plutonium<plutonium.archimedes@gmail.com>
4:05 AM 12Aug2023



to Plutonium Atom Universe

3.
14159 26535 89793 23846 26433 83279 50288 41971 69399 37510
58209 74944 59230 78164 06286 20899 86280 34825 34211 70679
82148 08651 32823 06647 09384 46095 50582 23172 53594 08128
48111 74502 84102 70193 85211 05559 64462 29489 54930 38196
44288 10975 66593 34461 28475 64823 37867 83165 27120 19091
45648 56692 34603 48610 45432 66482 13393 60726 02491 41273
72458 70066 06315 58817 48815 20920 96282 92540 91715 36436
78925 90360 01133 05305 48820 46652 13841 46951 94151 16094
33057 27036 57595 91953 09218 61173 81932 61179 31051 18548
07446 23799 62749 56735 18857 52724 89122 79381 83011 94912
98336 73362 44065 66430 86021 39494 63952 24737 19070 21798
60943 70277 05392 17176 29317 67523 84674 81846 76694 05132
00056 81271 45263 56082 77857 71342 75778 96091 73637 17872

14684 40901 22495 34301 46549 58537 10507 92279 68925 89235
42019 95611 21290 21960 86403 44181 59813 62977 47713 09960
51870 72113 49999 99837 29780 49951 05973 17328 16096 31859
50244 59455 34690 83026 42522 30825 33446 85035 26193 11881
71010 00313 78387 52886 58753 32083 81420 61717 76691 47303
59825 34904 28755 46873 11595 62863 88235 37875 93751 95778
18577 80532 17122 68066 13001 92787 66111 95909 21642 01989
38095 25720 10654 85863 27886 59361 53381 82796 82303 01952
03530 18529 68995 77362 25994 13891 24972 17752 83479 13151
55748 57242 45415 06959 50829 53311 68617 27855 88907 50983
81754 63746 49393 19255 06040 09277 01671 13900 98488 24012
85836 160

AP, King of Science

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Saturday, August 12, 2023 at 11:18:14 AM UTC-5, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:

So the mystery of pi-- what Old Math called -- transcendental is no longer really a mystery at all, for there are TWO numbers that act like pi, one of which is very much algebraic-- the square root of 10.

And why does mathematics require for one number to be in fact TWO numbers? It is because physics has quantum duality, meaning that something is both particle and wave simultaneously. The difference between 3.162... and 3.141... is a miniscule

difference of 0.021... In fact there are many many prefix numbers digits of important physics constants-- especially Magnetic Flux Quantum, and weak mixing angle (although we ignore the Standard Model b.s.), Electron g-factor (really the Dirac magnetic
monopole g-factor) and the Muon-g-factor, the Rydberg unit of energy.

Why does mathematics need at least One number that is represented by TWO Numbers? It is because of physics duality demands one number of mathematics define the Sigma Error contained within mathematics. Pi as both 3.16... and 3.14... sets the standard

for equality in mathematics as sigma error of 3.16/3.14 = 0.6%. If in physics experiments, the outcome is 0.6% or less you have equality of concepts. If more, then you do not have equality of concepts.

For the layperson in all of this, can be summarized as that geometry needs a sigma error, for a line is of length and no width and no depth. But, that means a contradiction for a line has to have some width some depth to exist. In steps our 0.021

factor in that a Line in Geometry has at least a 0.021 factor of width and depth in order to exist.


So in math, we really cannot have a Axiom of Line as being of length yet no width and no depth. Nor can we have a point of no length, no width and no depth.

So few if any professors of mathematics ever study formal logic and it really shows-- they cannot even admit slant cut of cone is Oval and not ellipse and they run and hide from the question like that of Andrew Wiles, Terence Tao, Thomas Hales, John
Stillwell. Instead of coming out forth right and admitting the slant cut of right circular cone is a Oval, no they run and hide, in fear that the next question put on them is -- give a geometry proof of Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

The reason that Mathematics axioms need a leeway for circle diameter times a constant number to equal circumference and that TWO numbers exist to fullfill that need as 3.14.... and 3.16.... is because of these axioms cannot have Line = length but no
width and no depth. If it does not have a width nor depth, the line itself cannot exist.

And that is why Pi in mathematics has TWO numbers to represent pi, so that a line-curve can exist and that a "point" in a graph exists for the difference between 3.162 - 3.141 = 0.021, that difference gives the line a width and a depth and gives the
Point a length, width and depth in order to exist at all.

AP

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Kookfight Fermilab,Dr.Mitesh Patel, Pallab Ghosh,Dr.Brendan Casey,Prof Graziano Venanzoni, too brainwashed to see muon is true electron of atoms stuck inside 840MeV Proton torus doing Faraday law, and the reason for its excess wobble.

Kibo Parry Moroney-Volney head of Kookmeisters of science wrote:
On Monday, September 27, 2021 at 1:16:58 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:

Kookfight!!!

Fermilab & brainwashed fools, Dr.Mitesh Patel, Dr.Brendan Casey,Prof Graziano Venanzoni, too brainwashed to see muon is true electron of atoms stuck inside 840MeV Proton torus doing Faraday law, and the reason for its excess wobble.

to Plutonium Atom Universe
Fermilab & brainwashed fools, Dr.Mitesh Patel, Dr.Brendan Casey,Prof Graziano Venanzoni, too brainwashed to see muon is true electron of atoms stuck inside 840MeV Proton torus doing Faraday law, and the reason for its excess wobble.

Physicists of today are too stupid to do physics. They cannot see that 105MeV X 9 is within sigma error of the neutron and proton of 940MeV and 938MeV, meaning that the actual proton is just 840MeV with a muon stuck inside going round and round in the
Faraday law.

In fact our physicists of today are all failures with their Standard Model and their subatomic particles that are balls that sit around and have no purpose, function, or task or job.

Idiots and fools are today's current physicists, with their balls of subatomic particle clumped in a nucleus, started by the Rutherford gold leaf experiment. But Rutherford and Bohr were absent minded on interpretation of gold leaf experiment for a alpha
particle that bounces back at 180degrees with a faster exit speed than entrance speed, is because the alpha particle hit Head-On collision with a chain of 79 gold atom muons doing the Faraday law inside a 79x840 windings of a gold proton torus. Bohr and
Rutherford became absent minded about physics-- not realizing that a bounce back with faster speed out meant the collision was not a sedentary nucleus of large mass, but because 79 muons rammed head-on into the incoming alpha particle.

Why so dumb are present day physicists that they rather have Maxwell's antisymmetric Equations of EM theory rather than admit, the Dirac magnetic monopole is the 0.5MeV particle that the fools of Fermilab and CERN think is the Atom's electron.

This story below by BBC, tells us more about how far brainwashing can go and extend as to make utter fools of today's current physics professors. Not a one of them has a 1/2 marble of logical intelligence, no, they have been feed hand to mouth, and
suckled tit of brainwashing.

--- quoting BBC ---
Scientists near Chicago say they may be getting closer to discovering the existence of a new force of nature.
They have found more evidence that sub-atomic particles, called muons, are not behaving in the way predicted by the current theory of sub-atomic physics.
Scientists believe that an unknown force could be acting on the muons.
More data will be needed to confirm these results, but if they are verified, it could mark the beginning of a revolution in physics.

All of the forces we experience every day can be reduced to just four categories: gravity, electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. These four fundamental forces govern how all the objects and particles in the Universe interact with each
other.
The findings have been made at a US particle accelerator facility called Fermilab. They build on results announced in 2021 in which the Fermilab team first suggested the possibility of a fifth force of nature.
Since then, the research team has gathered more d