Hush
It's been so long and you're still going?
I am 100% sure you are one of the "elites"/PARASITES that are responsible for literally teleport a fucking plane with orbs, aren't you?
I already presented a valid proof. It's your opinion that it isn't valid.
If C < P, C/D = A/r2. Which meant that there is only one constant, Pi will be the modern transcendental value approximately 3.141592652
If C > P for n ≥ n_threshold, C/D > A/r2. Here we have two constants. The trancendental area constant is LESS than the ALGEBRAIC circumference constant. It cannot be transcendental because the area constant is already transcendental in the first place. Meaningless to even trying to find it since we already has a transcendental value. Hence, we can postulate that it is both algebraic and constructible. It still must adheres to Optimality instead of arbitrary chosen because, the circle has smooth curvature and having infinite lines of symmetries.
Harry Lear proved that the circumference approximates to 3.144 to 3.145, which is already larger than the tolerance of the machine he uses where if pi is less, it would be about 3.142 based on the tolerances.
Optimality has a broad meaning. Hence, using "squaring the circumference" to lock it into one value is the only proper way.
So, you pretty much nuked yourself here.
Lol
"Not a valid proof."
Yeah, its not a "valid" proof to YOU and every single closed-minded mathematicians that don't want their thousand years belief collapsed.
Archimedes assumed C < P, but why did he ignores C > P? Why did he ignore the possibility of a circle having TWO constants?
It's quite simple.
Golden ratio.
The amount of anti golden ratio cult seen all over THE WORLD is, too much.
