- πbywayofΦquartercircle.jpg (183.82 KiB) Viewed 3182 times

I have been working on a way to explicitly show the π deficiency such to clarify how/why space and time are reciprocally related as a natural consequence of ordinary mathematics (and/or vice versa). This is in relation to the postulates of RSoT.

In essence: such a clarification would lend further credence to the postulates as they stand,

*however*
one might find a need to

*question* whether or not

*motion* is the constituency of the "whole" universe,

as: if the universe

*also* contains that which is

*not physical* (ie. consciousness) the 'motion' constituency

*must* be confined to the physical universe only, rather than the universe as a whole (as presently postulated).

In the image, AB (rational, terminating +1) may be a discrete unit(s) in relation to BC (irrational, non-terminating √5). When summed as AC and halved at point D, the latter

*incessantly coincides* with the circumference of the circle whose properties are 2r = 1. This is

*true* about the circumference of the

*entire circle*, provided the

*integrity of the relation* is preserved (as rotated about the origin). What we are interested in is point D in relation to E, as this relation "grounds"

*both* the unit square

*and* 2r = 1 circle: line and curve, as they follow naturally from +1 and √5 respectively. This is thus honoring the integrity of the relation, and ultimately why the Riemann Hypothesis is

*true* (by Ananke: it can not

*not* be true).

(The reason is relating to the dividing of one by

*"two"*. These "two" must be

*reciprocally related* such that a multiplicative operation would render their reunion. Insert: rational (real) and irrational

*"imaginary"* numbers. Their product is always one viz. 1 = Φ(π/4)², thus the real element must be "1/2" occupied by the real reciprocal of the "imaginary" element. This clarifies complex analysis as an inventive way to describe the interaction between rational and irrational numbers

*according to ordinary mathematics*. 'Ordinary mathematics' is contained in the postulates of Mr. Larson.)

_________________________________________________

CKIIT effectively finds these real/imaginary components as knowledge/belief *resp.*,

a perpetual dichotomy wherein one is always at the expense of the other. This is presently reflected

in the long-standing "believer vs. unbeliever" conflict.
The diagonal of a unit square is √2 and can be used to compose a lattice of smaller squares (shown in blue) of side √2/2. As it turns out, these squares were/are the "missing link" as they incessantly link any four equidistant points of a 2r = 1 circle. It is for this reason that "imbuing" Φ with √2/2 produces the (real) square of Φ in incessant relation to the 2r = 1 circle (and thus corresponding unit square as it applies to 'discrete units'). This is significant because one may then take the

*reciprocal* of this relation such to precisely measure/account for the consequent curve of DE. The

*reciprocal* of the square root of Φ is equal to the length of one quarter circle, and this is how/why π = 4/√Φ and not the "approximated" transcendental pi god (

*practically*) of 3.14159... (the gravity of this "approximation" error measures over thousands of years of human ignorance, and

*any advanced civilization would certainly use π as a standard of measure for immediately knowing how "progressed" another civilization is*.)

What is interesting about all of this is: the reciprocal contains the mechanics of the rotation(s), such to measure and account for. The first quarter is

*subtracted* such to gather the information of the circle/rotation (in/as

*one quarter*) then has five equal quarters added, the extra quarter to account for the first subtracted. This -1+5=4 quarters mechanic allows for an

*exchange of information*: collection upon -1 and exchange upon +5 = 4. The result is one particular circle composed of four symmetrical quarters, the properties of which (speed/energy) are as collected upon the subtraction the first quarter of the same.

If it is possible to show that the photon (ie. light, s/t = 1) is composed of an equivalent Α/Ω (direction) and beg/end (location) axis,

and the beg/end axis is effectively

*null* on the photon such to have the capacity to become occupied viz. s/t ≠ 1,

this would indicate

*the universe can not have a beg/end*.

This may be a precursor to understanding how/why the "Big Bang" model (and associated Relativity) is concealing perhaps what could be the greatest real

*"misconception"* in existence controlling the minds of the masses: if the universe was/is not "created" (ie. is

*eternal*), this is thoroughly catastrophic for any/all "creationist" accounts of the (real) physical universe in which we live.