# Is this Pi?... I'm afraid to work out the two triangles with question marks

#### Yidna

Ummm.....

You do know that the yellow shaded areas aren't triangles, don't you?

-Dan
yes. i think i call them question mark areas.
why is everyone so mean?

why are some people saying this is not pi without even looking?... it's upsetting.

Why are people purposefully upsetting me?

I know they are not triangles. and i even looked for what to call them for over an hour.

I believe i call them wedge segments, or shaded areas.

#### Yidna

Thousands of the smartest mathematicians the world have ever seen are wrong because you did the math three times. Man, where do these people keep coming from...
I'm making the picture still, and i can see it's pi, and I have decided rather than to be upset because people who i considered smarter than me... a math forum, aren't smarter than me at all in one way, since i am right.

you aren't even looking at how the wedge segments are equal. the overlap of the star, compared to the overlap of the circle.

you like to think you are smart right?... who doesn't.

I/ll make you so smart you'll never cross anyone's judgement without a full cross examination of his work first.

#### Yidna

In fact, this kind of thing does happen, and depressingly often.

Aside from a number of corrections to do the pendulum experiment right (and ignoring that any result from this experiment can only give you only a small number of correct digits of the value) I'd estimate that the video gives about as much accuracy as you are going to get. And what does a pendulum have to do with the Star of Lakshmi?

-Dan
Hi Dan.

Hang tight

I'm about to show the world Pi.

You seem like a nice guy.

I'm psychic.

You're just like me.

Hold fast for one more day.

I'll show you the key to the new world.

#### Yidna

Your method may or may not be valid for finding pi. I honestly have no idea. The point people are making is that the decimal value you claim as pi is not correct. It's already off at the third digit. We've known the approximate decimal value of pi for a long time (3.1415926535898... and that's all I can ever have been bothered to remember). There are rational approximations from four millenia ago that are closer than your proposed value.

On a side note, are you using a 128-bit calculator? Where do you even get one? Did you write it yourself?
I did all the math myself in a calc i found online https://keisan.casio.com/calculator

I know it seems unbelievable, but that's why I came here.\

It works.

i started by looking at gears.

i was drawing pictures to try and cut the gears in half to have the same value in area outside the cut and inside.

i came to a 16th gear and made it sharp... i saw the area change to opposite when making the angle dull.

I made the angle the same as lakshmi...

and then i was like... whaaa?

"this seems to be equal overhang of this circle and this gear, but only at this angle... i cut the side of the star in half exactly, run a radius through it... bang, i can already see this is something

i go to the calculator on google and do it... i hate it

i find new calc, i do again, i check

i have picture for you tomorrow....

#### Yidna

Yidna: That's one (Swear) of a typo then. Maybe you should check those figures just one more time.

Or are you saying that you have actually developed a new value for pi? pi isn't a number that is calculated by simple measurements any more so there is really no real room for debate on the value. And, hey, even the Greeks knew that pi was about 3.14. Your value of 3.12 just doesn't cut it.

I am happy to go on record that your number is wrong. (Not that I merely believe it's wrong, it's that it is definitely wrong.)

-Dan
Ok fine, Dan.

Look at the pic when it comes and show me my mistake please... 24 hours.

#### Yidna

Well, according to this guy, you're close ...

The correct Values for Pi
Thank you.

I acctually did the search where i took away more and more digits and found him too.

... and the pendulum guy who is always estimating pi lower than the NAZI pi.

#### topsquark

Math Team
Ok fine, Dan.

Look at the pic when it comes and show me my mistake please... 24 hours.
Honestly don't wait for me. I thought I'd poke in here to see where things were going. It's pretty much what I thought. I first made the observation that the question marked areas we being refered to as triangles so I thought it might be a good thing to emphasize.

I'm not going to get bothered by this any more. Your value of pi is wrong, either from a miscalculation or some other problem. Unless I wanted to get involved in fixing whatever the problem may be there is no point in my making further comments. If you can't seem to understand that you are trying to claim that the value of a quantity that has been exhaustively studied for at least two millennia is wrong then I simply feel bad for you.

Signing off.

-Dan

1 person

#### [email protected]

why are some people saying this is not pi without even looking?... it's upsetting.
I don't see why you are surprised. It is like you have a conference of cardio surgeons, and person A who has never went to medical school comes in:

Person A: "I think I proved that the heart is where our memories reside"
Surgeons: "But that is impossible, we have well researched this issue hundreds of years ago already".
Person A: "I checked my work three times, our heart is meant for thinking"
Surgeons: "You're wrong"
Person A: "Why is everybody so mean? You're not even looking at my work".

Yeah sure, everybody can do math. But if you say something that is in contradiction with something that mathematicians have been saying for over 2000 years, then please man, have some humility. Don't come claiming you have a different value of pi. Of course people will laugh at you.

Last edited by a moderator:
1 person

Math Team

1 person