[guest39538]

(pi*d)+D=c 

Then it must be

inner circle   pi * d = C

outer circle pi * (d+D)=C

[guest39538]

Even in wikipedia ,there is no proof that pi is a fixed number.
How the mathematicians agreed ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi

What this is saying is not what you think it is saying. 

It is approximately equal to 3.14159

After the 9 at the end there is lots more numbers, so that is why they say it is approximately equal.   That is all that means.

its decimal representation never ends and never settles into a permanent repeating pattern).

What you have to realise is you are trying to tell science they are wrong but then in what you think you are telling them is wrong, is the exact same thing as they already know but in different terms.   What I mean by this , science knows pi is not a fixed number (see the quote) but science also know it is a mathematical constant of approximately to a fractionally zero closeness result.
Understand that any alteration to Pi is not needed in science to repeat this accuracy in experiment over and over again.
Even if there was some minor discrepancy in Pi, it wouldn't make any difference to the measurement  and would be negligible. It simply is an idea that is not needed or would improve the accuracy of Pi.

[aetzbar (OP)]

ehind Pi's tiny change lies a new geometry.
For this geometry, the world of science has been waiting for 2,000 years.
This geometry connects us to physical reality.
This geometry has a new fixed number and is 1.007
This fixed number will also appear in the physical field.
Pi's tiny change conceals a huge revolution.

[Colin2B]

Then it must be

inner circle   pi * d = C

outer circle pi * (d+D)=C

I'm impressed

where D is the diameter of the circles line.

I understand what you mean but it would be better to describe D as the thickness of the line.  Then your formula works. If you describe it as the diameter of the line it assumes measured from one side of circle to other and formula would be different eg. Inner diameter and outer diameter of line.

[guest39538]

Then it must be

inner circle   pi * d = C

outer circle pi * (d+D)=C

I'm impressed

where D is the diameter of the circles line.

I understand what you mean but it would be better to describe D as the thickness of the line.  Then your formula works. If you describe it as the diameter of the line it assumes measured from one side of circle to other and formula would be different eg. Inner diameter and outer diameter of line.

I would of thought that the thickness of the line would represent the depth of the line.  Would it not be better to maybe say:

Where d is the diameter of the inner circle and D is the diameter of the boundary line between inner and outer circle?

[Bored chemist]

Even in wikipedia ,there is no proof that pi is a fixed number.
How the mathematicians agreed ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi

That wiki page points to this one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz_formula_for_%CF%80
where it shows you how to calculate the value of pi.There's 1 formula, and 1 value.
So, as usual, you are plainly wrong.

[aetzbar (OP)]

i saw number + number + number + number + and so on
I did not see a closed round line, and I did not see a diameter
I have not seen proof that a pi of a 1 mm round closed line,
Equal to the pi of a 100 mm round closed line
You will not find such proof in Wikipedia as well.
Was convenient for mathematicians to determine .... Pi is a fixed number
So they just determined ... Pi is a fixed number

[Bored chemist]

So they just determined ... Pi is a fixed number

...because it is a fixed number.

Do you understand that you have offered no evidence at all that you are right, nor have you shown that any of the points made against your idea is wrong?

[aetzbar (OP)]

I've already explained several times.
It is impossible to explain in words that the idea is correct.
It is impossible to explain in writing numbers that the idea is correct.
(Writing numbers - mathematical proof)
There is only one way to explain, and it is of real measurement.
The measurement will prove that there is inequality.
The diameters ratio of two circuits  >  from circumference ratio of the circles.

[Colin2B]

[

I'm impressed

I would of thought that the thickness of the line would represent the depth of the line.  Would it not be better to maybe say:

Where d is the diameter of the inner circle and D is the diameter of the boundary line between inner and outer circle?

Ok, bear with me here because we are using different terminology.


To me a diameter is the measure from one side of a circle to the other across the centre, whereas the measure of the thickness of the boundary line would not cross the centre so I wouldn't call it a diameter.


Draw 2 circles with same centre - you're good at drawing - call diameter of inner circle d1 and outer d2. Then d2-d1=half the distance between the edges of circles i.e. the thickness of the distances between their circumferences.

[guest39538]

[

I'm impressed

I would of thought that the thickness of the line would represent the depth of the line.  Would it not be better to maybe say:

Where d is the diameter of the inner circle and D is the diameter of the boundary line between inner and outer circle?

Ok, bear with me here because we are using different terminology.


To me a diameter is the measure from one side of a circle to the other across the centre, whereas the measure of the thickness of the boundary line would not cross the centre so I wouldn't call it a diameter.


Draw 2 circles with same centre - you're good at drawing - call diameter of inner circle d1 and outer d2. Then d2-d1=half the distance between the edges of circles i.e. the thickness of the distances between their circumferences.

d2 - d1 would not equal half the distance between circles.

It would have to be:

+d1=halfway of the thickness between circles?


d12.jpg (24.79 kB . 1015x625 - viewed 1572 times)

[evan_au]

I have not seen proof that a pi of a 1 mm round closed line,
Equal to the pi of a 100 mm round closed line
You will not find such proof in Wikipedia as well.

I just found it in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approximations_of_%CF%80#Polygon_approximation_to_a_circle

Archimedes (an ancient Greek mathematician) calculated the value of π for a "unit circle", where the radius = 1 unit, and the circumference is between 6.28169 and 6.28572 units.

You can set the units to be 1mm.
- You can can equally set the units to be 1km.
- Or even 1 unit = 1 decimeter (1dm = 100mm - even though this is not an "official" metric unit)

The proof works just as well in all cases, and calculates the same range of values for π.

Spoiler Alert: 3.16 is not in the possible range.

[Colin2B]

d2 - d1 would not equal half the distance between circles.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. The distance between the circles - the blue line in your diagram - is

It would have to be:

+d1=halfway of the thickness between circles?

Yes, that is also correct. It is the diameter of a circle whose circumference is exactly halfway between the inner and outer circles.
Now I'm doubly impressed. Not only are you using math to correctly describe your ideas, but you are also thinking real maths and making useful conclusions.

[guest39538]

d2 - d1 would not equal half the distance between circles.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough. The distance between the circles - the blue line in your diagram - is

It would have to be:

+d1=halfway of the thickness between circles?

Yes, that is also correct. It is the diameter of a circle whose circumference is exactly halfway between the inner and outer circles.
Now I'm doubly impressed. Not only are you using math to correctly describe your ideas, but you are also thinking real maths and making useful conclusions.

I always think real maths lol although sometimes I may not present it correctly . I will get there in time.