The Holographic Universe and Pi = 4 in Kinematics!

[sarkeizen]

The minions have no respect for those who they disagree with.

Speaking for myself, my waning respect for you has nothing to do with the fact that we disagree.  It's that you will write vague-paragraph long diatribes about people in this thread but can't take fifteen seconds to answer a straightforward, jargon-free question.  Which you have been asked twelve times by me...and other people in this thread want you to answer it too.

The minions headed by MarkE prefer not to be guided by truth in their postings, but by the rule of the gun (trolling, spamming, misdirections, psychological projections, etc).

"the rule of the gun"?  Seriously?  You are starting to sound unhinged.

They have come to believe in their false exceptionalism and their sense of being the chosen ones. That they can decide the destiny of this forum, that it is only them who can be right.

Dude.  I have spent many more years studying math than you have.  This is simply a fact.  On average my opinion will be better than yours.  I came up with a line of reasoning in about four minutes.  A line of reasoning that has you so frightened that you have spent over a week avoiding answering a simple question.

Which one of us falsely believes themselves to be exceptional again?   Sounds like you.

[gravityblock]

I came up with a line of reasoning in about four minutes.  A line of reasoning that has you so frightened that you have spent over a week avoiding answering a simple question.

Which one of us falsely believes themselves to be exceptional again?   Sounds like you.

A line of reasoning where you want to play both the "yes card" and "no card" simultaneously.  This is clearly evident, since you will not tell me what previous question the "If yes" portion refers to in question 3.

Gravock

[MarkE]

I don't see how this thread will move on.  The minions have no respect for those who they disagree with.  If I was a casual reader and poster, I would think twice about posting a view which they oppose.  The minions headed by MarkE prefer not to be guided by truth in their postings, but by the rule of the gun (trolling, spamming, misdirections, psychological projections, etc). They have come to believe in their false exceptionalism and their sense of being the chosen ones. That they can decide the destiny of this forum, that it is only them who can be right. 

However, you can have a view similar to theirs without being a minion by avoiding the rule of the gun they so often resort to when the debate isn't going in their favour.  It would be nice to see more people voice their opinions, but I doubt it will happen.  I would love to be proven wrong on this!  Stand up and speak out.  Rise above their suppression tactics.

Gravock

LOL, it is pretty obvious who here is adverse to facts and discussion and who is not.  Sarkeizen has asked you a plain and simple question a full dozen times now and you still refuse to answer.  You've changed your silly argument about Pi from being due to time factors which do not exist in geometry, to saying that you are using a different system of geometry than the rest of us, to saying that you are mixing elements from different geometry systems, but you will not identify which elements are from which system, to insisting that you are a victim of a trolling campaign.

[gravityblock]

Quantum Pi:  Discussions of the Reevaluation of the Reciprocal System

Compare my quotes below to the images attached to this post, as found at the Quantum Pi link.  The universe is pixelated at the planck length.  It is well known and accepted in physics that matter/energy is quantized and moves in discrete jumps and not in a continuous motion.  Nikola Tesla said, "I hold that space cannot be curved, for the simple reason that it can have no properties".  Since space isn't curved, then matter can not follow a diagonal or curved path, but must follow a rectilinear motion through space.

Gravock

Look up Planck's constant - matter/energy is quantized. A circle is theoretical, there's no perfect circle in nature anywhere.  A real circle with a time variable is quantized at the planck scale with a zig-zag or rectilinear circumference, just as you find with the square in the squares method.  This is how there is a convergence on the rectilinear circumference at the planck scale. 

Edit:  Also, in step two of the squaring method, we can see there are four points of the square which converge on the rectilinear circumference of the circle.  In each successive step of the squaring method, more and more points converge exponentially.  At the planck scale, all points will have converged on the rectilinear circumference of the circle.

Gravock

No, because a real circle with a time variable will have a path length which is also stuck at 4*D at the planck scale as it traverses through space-time in a zig-zag or rectilinear motion.  The path length of the circumference is 4*D with no approximation.

Gravock

Matter doesn't move in a continuous motion, it moves in discrete jumps at the planck length.  When the squaring method reaches the planck length, the inner square vertices will be at all points on the rectilinear circumference of the circle itself, which is not continuous and is made of discrete jumps.  The Manhattan path does correctly simulate the time variable in real circles at the planck length!

Edited for better clarification.

Gravock

No, the inner vertices at the planck length can not be connected with chords in a real circle with a time variable.  By connecting the inner vertices at the planck length with chords, then you are saying matter moves in a continuous motion and not in discrete jumps.

Gravock 

[d3x0r]

The issue I think is ... stating 'pi is not pi' is like saying 'a' is 'z'


so then the whole zlphzbet chznges; but it rezlly doesn't... it issue is, pi isn't the right constznt in zll cases; not thzt pi is sometimes z different vzlue.