THE REPEATING VALUE OF PI

THE MAN WHO WORKED OUT PI-THE BIBLE VALUE. STEPHEN A JEFFREY.
22/7*4/3.99999=3.142865. Pi to six digits.
22/7*4=12.57142857.
360 days/7=51.42857143.
51.42857143/12.57142857=4.090909091./4=1.022727273 weeks*51=52.15909092.
*7=365.1136364.days.
SQUARE ROOT OF PI/SQUARE ROOT OF 3.142865.=1.772453851/1.772810481=.999798833.
PHI=PI+1 PI-1
2.141793821.
4.141391487.
The earths orbit is not a circle but an elipse.Use matlab and my forumla to convert a circluar orbit to an elipse and backwards.
The difference should give you the six digit value for pi.
An irrational value for pi doesn't work.
365.2422-52.15909092=.01283143*24*60=18.4772592/3=5.543183303
5.543183301+5.543183303+5.5433183303=18.4772592
Infinite 666. 1/3 18.4772592+ 1/3 18.4772592+ 1/3 18.4772592=3/3=1

360/7=51.42857143/12.57146=4.0908988864/4=1.022724716*51=52.15896051*7=365.1127236*24=8,762.705366*60*60=31,545,739.32=5.867507513 *10 to the 12. km in a light year* 45,000000000000=2.640378381*10 ^26 Km/Light year Size of theuniverse.Radius.
.30795432 of day difference gives you 18.
But I have made a mistake the value of 18 minutess difference is wrong.But it is the value that gives you infinite 6666.
365.2425(greogrian calander)-365.1127236=.01297764*24*60=18.687016=6.2292672+6.2292672+6.2292672.
Adds up to 36+36+36=108=18*6. But this is the value for 666.The correct vlaue is.1297764.
So it is 10* 18 Minutes./3=666.

Dear Karen,
The credit for working out Pi belongs to my fx-100-AU CASIO.
C*1.42865*C*3.142865.
186,000m/s*3.142865*186000*3.142865=3.417254637 * 10^11.
Of course this value for Pi is different because it works out.
/PI=1.087745935*10 to the 11th.SO PI works out to 10 to the 11th places exactly.
Stephen Author of Genesis 2#- How to Fail at Telling a creation myth.
Steve
Dear Andrew Lamb
PI*186000m/second*PI*186,000m/second=3.414488339*10^11.
3.142865*186,000*3.142865*186,000=3.417254637*10^11
22/7*186000* 22/7*186,000=3.417237551*10^11.
Divide the two values for PI *10^11 and you should get 1.
It is as close to 1 as you can possibly imagine.
And the difference gives you the difference between finite PI(works out) and infinite PI which doesn't work out.
But both finite and infinite pi work out when multiplied by C squared.
This is an amazing fact and a miracle that God has built into the universe to show design.
Put this vaue into a supercomputer and use the finite value of Pi to the 10^11 instead of infinity.
As infinite m/second.Put this into the WASP supercomputer in Western Australia.
STEVE A JEFFREY
(.9999999/4*3.99999)*(22/7*4/3.99999)= 3.142857111.
With a Casio fx AU 100 Supercalculator.
Answer with windows calculator 3.1428571397142857142867142857143.
Take it to 10,000 digits and look at repeating Pi.
39/11=3.54545454545.
Time, The Fourth Dimension
We live in a world of three dimensions. Well, we only perceive three dimensions. We can hypothesize many more dimensions. But, they are difficult to imagine.
Because of Einstein, we often call time the fourth dimension. Special relativity shows that time behaves surprisingly like the three spatial dimensions. The Lorenz equations show this. Length contracts as speed increases. Time expands as speed increases.
Scientists have been graphing time, as if it were a length, for hundreds of years. To the left is a typical graph, showing two things in motion at the same speed, one to the left and one to the right. Time never behaves exactly like a spatial dimension. You cannot go backward in time. And you normally cannot go forward at different rates. But, there are surprising parallels. For some purposes, it is handy to call time a fourth dimension. For other purposes
Pretend, for a moment, that there are more than three spatial dimensions. What is a four or five-dimensional cube like? It is hard to visualize. But, we can make a few deductions about such an object. What if a 5-dimensional cube is 2 centimeters on a side, what is its 5-dimensional volume? Well, we can easily generalize from the first three dimensions. A 2x2 square is 4 (2x2) square centimeters in area. A 2x2x2 cube is 8 (2x2x2) cubic centimeters in volume. A 2x2x2x2x2 5-dimensional cube is 32 centimeters-to-the-5th-power in 5-dimensional volume. None of that can be visualized. But, it makes sense. What is the distance between two points in 5-space? You can easily deduce a 5-dimensional Pythagorean Theorem.
History of Pi
A little known verse of the Bible reads
And he made a molten sea, ten cubits from the one brim to the other: it was round all about, and his height was five cubits: and a line of thirty cubits did compass it about.
The same verse can be found in II Chronicles 4, 2. It occurs in a list of specifications for the great temple of Solomon, built around 950 BC and its interest here is that it gives π = 3. Not a very accurate value of course and not even very accurate in its day, for the Egyptian and Mesopotamian values of 25/8 = 3.125 and √10 = 3.162 have been traced to much earlier dates: though in defence of Solomon's craftsmen it should be noted that the item being described seems to have been a very large brass casting, where a high degree of geometrical precision is neither possible nor necessary. There are some interpretations of this which lead to a much better value.
The fact that the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle is constant has been known for so long that it is quite untraceable. The earliest values of π including the 'Biblical' value of 3, were almost certainly found by measurement. In the Egyptian Rhind Papyrus, which is dated about 1650 BC, there is good evidence for 4 (8/9)2 = 3.16 as a value for π.
The first theoretical calculation seems to have been carried out by Archimedes of Syracuse (287-212 BC). He obtained the approximation
223/71 < π < 22/7.
Before giving an indication of his proof, notice that very considerable sophistication involved in the use of inequalities here. Archimedes knew, what so many people to this day do not, that π does not equal 22/7, and made no claim to have discovered the exact value. If we take his best estimate as the average of his two bounds we obtain 3.1418, an error of about 0.0002.
Here is Archimedes' argument.
Consider a circle of radius 1, in which we inscribe a regular polygon of 3 2n-1 sides, with semiperimeter bn, and superscribe a regular polygon of 3 2n-1 sides, with semiperimeter an.
The diagram for the case n = 2 is on the right.
The effect of this procedure is to define an increasing sequence
b1 , b2 , b3 , ...
and a decreasing sequence
a1 , a2 , a3 , ...
such that both sequences have limit π.
Using trigonometrical notation, we see that the two semiperimeters are given by
an = K tan(π/K), bn = K sin(π/K),
where K = 3 2n-1. Equally, we have
an+1 = 2K tan(π/2K), bn+1 = 2K sin(π/2K),
and it is not a difficult exercise in trigonometry to show that
(1/an + 1/bn) = 2/an+1 . . . (1)
an+1bn = (bn+1)2 . . . (2)
Archimedes, starting from a1 = 3 tan(π/3) = 3√3 and b1 = 3 sin(π/3) = 3√3/2, calculated a2 using (1), then b2 using (2), then a3 using (1), then b3 using (2), and so on until he had calculated a6 and b6. His conclusion was that
b6 < π < a6 .
It is important to realise that the use of trigonometry here is unhistorical: Archimedes did not have the advantage of an algebraic and trigonometrical notation and had to derive (1) and (2) by purely geometrical means. Moreover he did not even have the advantage of our decimal notation for numbers, so that the calculation of a6 and b6 from (1) and (2) was by no means a trivial task. So it was a pretty stupendous feat both of imagination and of calculation and the wonder is not that he stopped with polygons of 96 sides, but that he went so far.
For of course there is no reason in principle why one should not go on. Various people did, including:

Ptolemy
(c. 150 AD)
3.1416
Zu Chongzhi
(430-501 AD)
355/113
al-Khwarizmi
(c. 800 )
3.1416
al-Kashi
(c. 1430)
14 places
Viète
(1540-1603)
9 places
Roomen
(1561-1615)
17 places
Van Ceulen
(c. 1600)
35 places
Except for Zu Chongzhi, about whom next to nothing is known and who is very unlikely to have known about Archimedes' work, there was no theoretical progress involved in these improvements, only greater stamina in calculation. Notice how the lead, in this as in all scientific matters, passed from Europe to the East for the millennium 400 to 1400 AD.
Al-Khwarizmi lived in Baghdad, and incidentally gave his name to 'algorithm', while the words al jabr in the title of one of his books gave us the word 'algebra'. Al-Kashi lived still further east, in Samarkand, while Zu Chongzhi, one need hardly add, lived in China.
The European Renaissance brought about in due course a whole new mathematical world. Among the first effects of this reawakening was the emergence of mathematical formulae for π. One of the earliest was that of Wallis (1616-1703)
2/π = (1.3.3.5.5.7. ...)/(2.2.4.4.6.6. ...)
and one of the best-known is
π/4 = 1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + ....
This formula is sometimes attributed to Leibniz (1646-1716) but is seems to have been first discovered by James Gregory (1638- 1675).
These are both dramatic and astonishing formulae, for the expressions on the right are completely arithmetical in character, while π arises in the first instance from geometry. They show the surprising results that infinite processes can achieve and point the way to the wonderful richness of modern mathematics.
From the point of view of the calculation of π, however, neither is of any use at all. In Gregory's series, for example, to get 4 decimal places correct we require the error to be less than 0.00005 = 1/20000, and so we need about 10000 terms of the series. However, Gregory also showed the more general result
tan-1 x = x - x3/3 + x5/5 - ... (-1 x 1) . . . (3)
from which the first series results if we put x = 1. So using the fact that
tan-1(1/√3) = π/6 we get
π/6 = (1/√3)(1 - 1/(3.3) + 1/(5.3.3) - 1/(7.3.3.3) + ...
which converges much more quickly. The 10th term is 1/(19 39√3), which is less than 0.00005, and so we have at least 4 places correct after just 9 terms.
An even better idea is to take the formula
π/4 = tan-1(1/2) + tan-1(1/3) . . . (4)
and then calculate the two series obtained by putting first 1/2 and the 1/3 into (3).
Clearly we shall get very rapid convergence indeed if we can find a formula something like
π/4 = tan-1(1/a) + tan-1(1/b)
with a and b large. In 1706 Machin found such a formula:
π/4 = 4 tan-1(1/5) - tan-1(1/239) . . . (5)
Actually this is not at all hard to prove, if you know how to prove (4) then there is no real extra difficulty about (5), except that the arithmetic is worse. Thinking it up in the first place is, of course, quite another matter.
With a formula like this available the only difficulty in computing π is the sheer boredom of continuing the calculation. Needless to say, a few people were silly enough to devote vast amounts of time and effort to this tedious and wholly useless pursuit. One of them, an Englishman named Shanks, used Machin's formula to calculate π to 707 places, publishing the results of many years of labour in 1873. Shanks has achieved immortality for a very curious reason which we shall explain in a moment.Here is a summary of how the improvement went:
1699:
Sharp used Gregory's result to get 71 correct digits
1701:
Machin used an improvement to get 100 digits and the following used his methods:
1719:
de Lagny found 112 correct digits
1789:
Vega got 126 places and in 1794 got 136
1841:
Rutherford calculated 152 digits and in 1853 got 440
1873:
Shanks calculated 707 places of which 527 were correct
A more detailed Chronology is available.
Shanks knew that π was irrational since this had been proved in 1761 by Lambert. Shortly after Shanks' calculation it was shown by Lindemann that π is transcendental, that is, π is not the solution of any polynomial equation with integer coefficients. In fact this result of Lindemann showed that 'squaring the circle' is impossible. The transcendentality of π implies that there is no ruler and compass construction to construct a square equal in area to a given circle.
Very soon after Shanks' calculation a curious statistical freak was noticed by De Morgan, who found that in the last of 707 digits there was a suspicious shortage of 7's. He mentions this in his Budget of Paradoxes of 1872 and a curiosity it remained until 1945 when Ferguson discovered that Shanks had made an error in the 528th place, after which all his digits were wrong. In 1949 a computer was used to calculate π to 2000 places. In this and all subsequent computer expansions the number of 7's does not differ significantly from its expectation, and indeed the sequence of digits has so far passed all statistical tests for randomness.You can see 2000 places of π.We should say a little of how the notation π arose. Oughtred in 1647 used the symbol d/π for the ratio of the diameter of a circle to its circumference. David Gregory (1697) used π/r for the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its radius. The first to use π with its present meaning was an Welsh mathematician William Jones in 1706 when he states "3.14159 andc. = π". Euler adopted the symbol in 1737 and it quickly became a standard notation.
We conclude with one further statistical curiosity about the calculation of π, namely Buffon's needle experiment. If we have a uniform grid of parallel lines, unit distance apart and if we drop a needle of length k < 1 on the grid, the probability that the needle falls across a line is 2k/π. Various people have tried to calculate π by throwing needles. The most remarkable result was that of Lazzerini (1901), who made 34080 tosses and got
π = 355/113 = 3.1415929
which, incidentally, is the value found by Zu Chongzhi. This outcome is suspiciously good, and the game is given away by the strange number 34080 of tosses. Kendall and Moran comment that a good value can be obtained by stopping the experiment at an optimal moment. If you set in advance how many throws there are to be then this is a very inaccurate way of computing π. Kendall and Moran comment that you would do better to cut out a large circle of wood and use a tape measure to find its circumference and diameter.
Still on the theme of phoney experiments, Gridgeman, in a paper which pours scorn on Lazzerini and others, created some amusement by using a needle of carefully chosen length k = 0.7857, throwing it twice, and hitting a line once. His estimate for π was thus given by
2 0.7857 / π = 1/2
from which he got the highly creditable value of π = 3.1428. He was not being serious!
It is almost unbelievable that a definition of π was used, at least as an excuse, for a racial attack on the eminent mathematici Landau's in 1934. had def Landau's ined π in this textbook published in Göttingen in that year by the, now fairly usual, method of saying that π/2 is the value of x between 1 and 2 for which cos x vanishes. This unleashed an academic dispute which was to end in dismissal Landau's from his chair at Göttingen. Bieberbachan eminent number theorist who disgraced himself by his racist views, explains the reasons for Landau's dismissal:-
Thus the valiant rejection by the Göttingen student body which a great mathematician, , has experienced is due in the final analysis to the fact that the un-German style of this man in his research and teaching is unbearable to German feelings. A people who have perceived how members of another race are working to impose ideas foreign to its own must refuse teachers of an alien culture.
G H Hardy replied immediately to Bieberbachch in a published note about the consequences of this un-German definition of π
There are many of us, many Englishmen and many Germans, who said things during the War which we scarcely meant and are sorry to remember now. Anxiety for one's own position, dread of falling behind the rising torrent of folly, determination at all cost not to be outdone, may be natural if not particularly heroic excuses. Professor Bieberbach's reputation excludes such explanations of his utterances, and I find myself driven to the more uncharitable conclusion that he really believes them true.
Not only in Germany did π present problems. In the USA the value of π gave rise to heated political debate. In the State of Indiana in 1897 the House of Representatives unanimously passed a Bill introducing a new mathematical truth.
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Indiana: It has been found that a circular area is to the square on a line equal to the quadrant of the circumference, as the area of an equilateral rectangle is to the square of one side.
The Senate of Indiana showed a little more sense and postponed indefinitely the adoption of the Act!
Intensity of radio echoes reflected on surface of a meteoric plasma column
Shimizu Minoru
1.IntroductionWhen plasma frequency in the meteoric trail is higher than frequency of incoming VHF radio waves,the plasma can reflect radio waves like a mirror.And this reflected radio waves is observed as meteoric overdense echo.As radius of the meteoric trail is about tens meter,the same order of wave length of the VHF radio wave,I think the reflection is thought to be scattering of waves. Thereby, I made simulation about radio wave reflection on the meteoric plasma on the basis of wave theory.2.Basis of the simulationAs well-known, Maxwell's equation describes electromagnetic waves in the space. In this simulation radio echo is supposed to be overdense echo, thereby no electric field is being in the meteoric plasma and electric field composed of incoming and reflected radio wave is vertical to the surface of the plasma.This is also the boundary condition for differential equation in this simulation.(1)Topological form of the meteoric plasma and used coordination for this simulation .In this simulation,meteoric plasma has cylindrical form having radius r0, its axis is parallel to z axis of cylindrical coordination.Here note that in cylindrical coordination r means and means arctan(y/x).(2)Radio waveLetting k denoting k wave number projected on x-y plane and kz denoting z component of the wave number.The radio wave has frequency and linearly polarized to have electric fields E on x-z plane.The Maxwell's equation in these condition ishere,c means light speed in the vacuum and E means z component of electric field E.Now,considering plane radio wave Ei travelling to x direction.Where , and wave length This plane radio wave satisfies the Maxwell's equation, and this wave represents incoming wave to the meteoric plasma column.The following radio wave Er represents reflected radio wave by the meteoric column because asymptotic form of the wave represents outwardly spreading wave.And this wave satisfies Lapace equation as shown below in cylindrical coordination,i.e one of the solutions of the Maxwell's equation.Where (3)Boundary conditionSince electric field E polarized in x-z plane,the component of the electric field parallel to the surface of the plasma column is should be zero on the surface of the column because the plasma is supposed to be conductive material.Therefore, following condition should be satisfied on the surface of the meteoric column.(4)Reflected wave formThis boundary condition demands following equation for a0 and an.By introducing these a0 and an into formula of Er, reflected wave is completely described.The amplitude of reflected radio wave with angle by the column, and having radius of r0, isFollowing figure shows calculated Intensity of the echo depending r0 of the column and reflected angle .
3.ConsiderationIntensity of the echo doesn't proportion to the radius of the meteoric plasma column because of refraction around the column for incoming radio waves .And the echo also has asymmetric reflection intensity distribution on reflection angle .I guess these evidences give hints about time dependent intensity variation for overdense echoes.The radius of the plasma column spreads because of diffusion in upper atmosphere,and it sometimes make slow fading on the intensity of the echoes,especially radius of the column is the values of zero points of Bessel functions divided by k.
Mean Median and the Mode of PI.
39/11=3.545454545.Sunday, February 21, 2010
JEFFREYS THEORY OF EVERYTHING

My theory of everything for WASP..
Steve Jeffreys collary to the law of non contradiction.
Opposite particles X and Y cannot be in the SAME STATE at the SAME TIME in the SAME PLACE THE EXCEPTION PRIOR TO THE BIG BANG...
FOUR STATES ARE ONE PRIOR TO THE BIG BANG AND THE FOUR FORCES DEPEND ON THE FOUR STATES SO THEY ARE ALSO ONE.
E=MC^2 depends on momentum an momentum is determined by state.
This is a means for a Big crunch to store the potential energy of a prexisting universe and release it as Kinetic energy in the big bang.
The mechanism is super critical non newtoinan fluids or four states of matter in one.....................
This give you a mechanism for the big bang you can use WASP To calculate the potential energy of the prexisting universe and the kinetic energy of the big bang.
You asked me to give you a thoery it is simplified it does not include determinism.
Determinism in the early universe maks it too complicated.Suffice to say qantum effects did not kick in until after the Big Bang everything prior to that was determinism rather than randomness.
The reason being is as you go back in time order or reverse entropy increases and becomes infinite.
I can argue there is no need for God but I don't want to.
And that is the characteristic of every true believer they want to believe.
Steve.

The universal energy equation is 2+2=4 Over a cycle the big bang and the big crunch have to balance 2+2=4.
But due to thermodynamics a little energy is lost with each cycle like a bouncing ball.
And to balance 2+2 so that it equals four we have to increase mass as it goes backward in time.
So that with infinite time we have infinite mass.Which EInstein said was a dealbreaker.............
Infinite mass is an impossibility.
And since it is the only way to make 2+2=4 balance.
Then there is another way that is for energy to be fetched like a bucket of water from dimension X nihilo.
Creative energy is fetched from ex-nihilo making the big bang balance for the universal energy equation 2+2=4.

Einsteins second equation for mass approaching the speed of light includes momentum.
And momentum is determined by state so when four states are one E=MC^2 is a different equation for prior to the big bang.
Posted by STEVE at 12:58 AM