Basically, you’re not including the perimeter of the circle in your derivation. You’re trying to approach it and this is not enough to demonstrate π=3.1446. If you’re trying just another way to approximate it and the first objection you’ll meet is that you’re inserting this value arbitrarily, which is not completely untrue.
Write down your reasons but I will read it tomorrow. No time now.
C.B. will do. Talk to you tomorrow then.
I was wondering... When performing the circumference of the Circle, which Pi do you use?
Performing which circumference?
C.B. of the circle. The perimeter belongs to all polygons. Only circles or spheres have circumferences. When performing the circumference, Pi is the constant of use.
If using 3.1415, then the circumference is not the same as that of 3.144606.
One could use 2 * 3.141593 * Radius and get a result totally different to that of 2 * 3.144606 * radius.
But because polygons have fixed values, there results will always be the same.
Jude Andre Charles of the circle. The perimeter belongs to all polygons. Only circles or spheres have circumferences. When performing the circumference, Pi is the constant of use.
Yes, but to what circumference are you referring to?
Jude Andre Charles But because polygons have fixed values, there results will always be the same.
Circles have fixed values too but we were unable to measure their perimeter directly and only approximating.
The fixed value of the basic circle is 3.1446.
C.B. Yes, but to what circumference are you referring to?
I must admit that I'm seriously confused about your question. You would need to enlighten me:
Are there circumferences for polygons other than the circle?
I thought that all polygons (except the circle) have perimeters, and only circles and spheres have circumferences. Did that change?
The word Perimeter is not exclusive for polygons. It just means the way around a central place. It is a Greek word.
Circumference means the same but its origin is Latin.
Now let’s go to the point if you’re still interested: How do you derive the π value using the angles of the Pyramid.?
Tell me only the rational, not the whole story with the diagrams. Just the concept.
C.B. honestly, I would not know. I've had a hard time figuring out Pi out of angles due to trigonometry being "programmed" using the old value of Pi;
With the old value of PI, the angle shown for the true value of PI 3.144606 is 51.827292, but I suspect that it should be 51.777088, which 32 times Phi.
32 is merely the logical circumference of a circle if Pi squared multiplied by 2 Phi.
Then multiply the result by the Golden Ratio (Phi) which gives 51.777088, close to 51.827292.
I do not have all the answers. I'm still in learning and uncovering mode. If you know something I don't, please help me out.
Jude Andre Charles I do not have all the answers. I'm still in learning and uncovering mode. If you know something I don't, please help me out.
Yeah, I’ll do.
The basic thing you have to understand is, that by giving a certain value for the angle…51.8…°, you’re inserting at the same time the value of the circumference you’re going to obtain. This is not a demonstration of the exact value of π but a demonstration that the Egyptians, or whoever made the Pyramids, did use that value.
If you want to find a method to demonstrate that 3.1446 is the absolute value of the circumference (always diameter 1, the basic circle) you have to find a method that is independent of a certain value and it’s valid for every value.
This is basically all you have to know to begin your search.
C.B. are you able to demonstrate for my understanding?
I did already.
Didn’t you follow my own derivation of the π value?
it begins with the premise that a Square has the same perimeter as a circle:
4b=π
and it is valid for every circle.
if we put
2π then it will be = to 2(4b) or 8b and so on.
And from there on you can develop the equality to find out the value.
C.B. but that is based on Pi as a Perimeter... That is, 3.1415
C.B. that can't work because it will happen for any imaginable Pi one can think of.
The Proof needs to be in accordance with the Golden Ratio, the squaring of the circle, the Pythagorean Theorem, the Tycho Brahe's Right Triangle, all in one harmonious arrangement.
This here shows the discrepancy of 3.1415
Jude Andre Charles that can't work because it will happen for any imaginable Pi one can think of.
This works fantastic.
4b=π contains no preconceived value of π. You solve it and you get 3.1446 and only this one.
and 4b=π works for every magnitude
x4b = x*π
but, you can always simplify the x
(x/x)4b = π
(1)4b = π
and return to the basic circle of π with diameter 1.
C.B. you did see the previous images of the Pi being 4b=Pi?
b=pi/4
It's doesn't show that pi is 3.14460551103. It only shows one fourth of any number, may it be 3.144606 or otherwise.
The Proof needs to more in trigonometric relationships
Jude Andre Charles It's doesn't show that pi is 3.14460551103.
this is the idea, a method that doesn’t show any value beforehand. Otherwise you don’t need to search for it if you have it already.
You just look for some relationship btw the terms to obtain a numerical value.
No trigonometry needed here.
