The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!

[verpies]

Any fourth grader with a compass, a thread, a tack, and a ruler can show that the ratio of circumference to diameter otherwise known as Pi is a lot closer to 22/7 than it is to 28/7.

This is going to be fun!

I have analyzed Mathis' papers regarding the issue of π=4 in kinematic situations and could not find an error in it.
π still equals to 3.14... in static geometry done by 4^th graders, that does not involve motion

These two situations are clearly different and should not be conflated.

Take a look at the kinematic scenario depicted in the attached AVR1.pdf
Which answer do you think is correct?: Diag.3 or Diag.4 or Diag.5

@Gravityblock
Mathis appears to be a great free thinker.
I think what MarkE is trying to demonstrate is that if Mathis is wrong about such basic issue as Π then he cannot be trusted with his other conclusions (such as his B-Photons of the charge field, evanescent waves, nuclear structure, etc...).

[MarkE]

Yes, the above quote is true for static or abstract circles, but it is not true for orbits or real circles with motion and includes a time variable.  The arc of a cycloid is 8r, which pi is also replaced by 4, just as in the Manahattan metric.  In orbits and circles drawn out over time, you can't compare a velocity (the diameter) to an acceleration (the circumference) because you need more information.  Oddities such as this, which misses it by 27%,  is one of the many reasons why things don't work out in the real world like they do on paper.  Read and understand the article, then comment.  Condemnation before investigation is folly, which is the mentality of a fourth grader!

Gravock

Pi staunchly refuses to change even for very small or very large values of pi.  Using the wrong named constant in a problem and then declaring that the named constant's value has changed because that constant's value does not fit the problem belies a misunderstanding of what the word "constant" means.

[verpies]

Using the wrong named constant in a problem and then declaring that the named constant's value has changed because that constant's value does not fit the problem belies a misunderstanding of what the word "constant" means.

Are you saying that uniform circular motion is a worse measure of a circle than a piece of string?

What is your name for the following ratio?:
t_C / t_D

Where:
t_C = Time period of one revolution in uniform circular motion.
t_D = Time period necessary to travel the diameter by a constant velocity equal in magnitude to the tangent velocity of the uniform circular motion.

[MarkE]

Are you saying that uniform circular motion is a worse measure of a circle than a piece of string?

What is the name of the following ratio in your book?:
t_C / t_D

Where:
t_C = Period of one revolution in uniform circular motion.
t_D = Period necessary to travel the diameter by a constant velocity equal in magnitude to the tangent velocity of the uniform circular motion.

Pi is a symbol for the ratio of circumference to diameter of a perfect circle.  That ratio is a constant value.  If a ratio between two quantities is a different value then one or both are not proportional to the circumference and diameter of the same perfect circle. 

If one travels at a constant speed then the time taken to follow one path versus another is the ratio of the lengths of the paths. 

[verpies]

Pi is a symbol for the ratio of circumference to diameter of a perfect circle. 

...but what is a perfect circle?  Is it formed non-physically / abstractly on paper, or physically by inertia of a moving mass and some quasi-centripetal force?
These two circles are not equivalent. ...but both have circumferences and diameters that are measured differently and analyzed differently by math since the former does not contain a time variable and the latter does.

If one travels at a constant speed then the time taken to follow one path versus another is the ratio of the lengths of the paths.

Agreed.  But when you measure the circumference of a perfect circle with constant tangential velocity of a moving mass and its diameter with the constant velocity of equal magnitude then you are dealing with a physical circle and the two lengths of these two different physical paths obtained by this method, refer to that physical circle  ...and the ratio of these two lengths is 4.

When you measure a non-physical circle (e.g. abstract circle on paper) then the ratio of its circumference to diameter is 3.1415...
If you limit your definition of Π as the ratio of circumference to diameter in abstract circles only, then you are only correct.