Look HRBot (Harry leaR Bag-of-Tricks),
Since you've been a good sport, and suspect you sincerely believe you've solved Pi = 3.1446 in this latest attempt (your 6th one?), I'm going to try and help you understand why this is just another pile of horseshit.
The first part of your proof is mathematically ok:
As for the Circle we use 4b as π to calculate the area:
4br2
4b(1/2)2
4b*1/4= b
At the end of this pointless process you have:
Acircle = b
Asquare = b2
The next part of your proof is where everything falls apart because its based upon a flawed and unproven assumption(s):
We take the values b and b2 to construct a right triangle of legs b and b2 inscribed in a semicircle
We take a semicircle of Diameter or Hypotenuse 1, because it is the only semicircle where b and b2 will have their real values π/4 and (π/4)2.
We apply Pythagoras:
b4 + b2 – 1 = 0
And obtain the value of b or π/4:
b = 0.78615
In this second step you arbitrarily assign your variable (which you call a constant), b and b2, the area of the circle and square respectively, as two legs of a right triangle and then WRONGLY assume the hypotenuse of this assumed right-triangle is automatically equal to "1" but you haven't proven that a triangle with legs of length 'b' truly has a hypotenuse equal to '1'; its an assumption.
You need to realize that the hypotenuse of the triangle may have any value because 'b' is completely unknown. If you don't know anything about the value of 'b', and if the length of the hypotenuse depends entirely upon the value of 'b', it is wrong to infer the hypotenuse is somehow automatically fixed and equal to the value of '1' if 'b' is completely unknown.
Since 'b' is completely unknown the hypotenuse is also completely unknown. By substituting random values for 'b' the hypotenuse of an assumed right-triangle may be calculated as follows:
...but you still don't know anything about the true value of 'b' nor the hypotenuse. In fact you don't actually know that a triangle of leg lengths 'b' and 'b2' is even a right triangle at all, which is the second foolish assumption in your horseshit Pi = 3.1446 proof. You're assuming a right-triangle relationship of an unknown variable 'b', and then falsely assume 'b' is mathematically related to the number '1' so all you're really doing is adding more and more bullshit assumptions on top of your Pi = 3.1446 horseshit pile unless first credibly proven otherwise.
Have no idea how you can be so goddam stupid to think up this horseshit nonsense all the time, which is actually ok because we're all human and make mistakes, but to arrogantly think you're so smart, smarter than all mathematicians in the world, producing one fake pi proof after another because you've invented a new and improved Pi = 3.1446 is unbelievable. Get it through your thick goddam skull that you have to first find a way to calculate the actual circumference of a circle in order to solve Pi – just like Archimedes did, there are NO short-cuts – dumb ass.
You are in fact still trying to solve for Pi using Pi as a variable even though you deny it, because this time you used one of your bag-of-tricks by assigning the variable 'Pi' to another variable 'b', and then you can say "oh look mom, I'm not using Pi as a variable to solve for Pi'. But you're using 'b' which is 'Pi' in disguise to try and foolishly solve for Pi which is cheating - dumb-ass. No end of entertainment from you morons (LOL).
