/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15398928
Continued fraction

So we shouldn't be building them.

However I dislike that it kills people in the process.
Nuclear bombs are especially dangerous if someone misunderstands someome else. Otherwise they would not be fired.

They can be very efficient at enabling new life to emerge.

>>15342717
Yes

>>12315971
Turnover of internal material into a body's attractive field of radiation literally cancels any net affect of time.

This happened:
Oxygen came together with a grill's charcoal bed, it fell out in pieces, but back together with the Earth (nature).
There was no net effect on how separate the pieces of the world are, only TRANSfer.

There's net conservation of "material" intactness which makes entropy an insidious commie lie.

There is the collective nigger god LEGION and the white individual God LESBIAN.*

Space isn't a vacuum: it's loose flowing pieces that objects eat to excrete their fields
which don't stop incoming objects because these fields of "TINY" pieces ghost through them.

Here's another set of facts.
The world has an infinite number of pieces, each thing has an infinite number of pieces,
each piece has an infinite number of pieces, each thing has surroundings,
and the only thing the world can have to surround it is itself THEREFORE
each thing is the world sitting inside itself.

All things are centened about an isovectorial core that results in turnover into field pieces
ghosting out through what's incoming rather than the "crystal of stillness in balance" that
imbecile Michio Kaku posited this would result in.
Mutual isopressure vectorially results in internal "heat" which "radiates SPEWS the interiors
of the participating objects out as their fields,
which means for EACH thing coming together from separate things
JUST AS MUCH comes apart AND VICE VERSA.

*Objects literally move or remain in location DUE TO THEIR POLITICS.

It's not okay to push a question bothering you to another person as their problem to find out how they would solve it.

Let's focus on the geometric solution and not how good you are at debating a fact, since that will leave you with two wrong answers.

>>11692157
Yes, thank you!
It states on the geometrical problem itself that this gives the accurate value of pi, but then again pi is transcendental.
As far I've understood pi was based on being the diameter's relation to thr circumference.

So if it can be done geometrically yet we come across contradictory things, it definitely should be looked into.
Reason is so refreshing to see.

>>11692146
The value of pi has been under dispute since the very moment it was defined since it was known to not be accurate but most accurate so far.

I'll gladly be your punching bag, throw me some more. I need to be ready to take worse shit for this than what you have.

>>11692109
Pair has throughout history been treated as a unit. All the way up until modern age.

>>11692107
It's a possible way to find out the real value of pi that can be proven instead of agreed upon. I hope you see things a little more openly in the future when they serve no other agenda than correction.

>>11692098
It's kind of concerning you call plausible new knowledge retarded.

>>11692090
Two negatives form a positive and thus begins infinity.

>>11692086
I am seeking help as we speak.
Why don't you help me find it?

>>11692086
I am not interesting in yet another reasoning why it is impossible when the very solution was proven to be impossible in 1882.

Thus I provide the solution.
This only proves you are the core of the issue - use the already acquired knowledge that is being proven wrong as the weapon.

>>11692071
I call it a butterfly.
Not involved with Q or S.
Misdirections.

>>11692038
You know the drill. Credit where credit is due even when the support is mental.

>>11692038
Yeah, I can confirm.
If there is any specific evidence I can provide, that kind of request can only come from another. That's how you know if you've lost contact.

There are a couple interesting things I can provide.

89÷55 results in an interesting version of the golden ratio. The numbers are from fibonacci line.
3.14591459145914, which is fibonacci pi.
Our research with vitruvian man halted at double pentagram.

Regarding the image on the left, what do you call an open coffee filter? lmao

>>11692018
Hahaha yeah literally.

>>11691970
This comment made me feel so good.
You know exactly how I feel.
I got slapped across the face by my peers for this exact reason.

It's not at all about better or worse it's more about right or wrong.

If this gains enough attention through 4chan and is provably the right solution, it should be enough to force those who decide about these things to pay attention to it after which it could be applied to whatever it can be used for.

>>11691932
I would be glad that there are people who know this to be true so that I can be sane again.

I understand it's said to be impossible.
That should be all the more reason to look into it though.

Suggesting that I have any other intent than what I directly stated here is really frustrating since I made it as clear as I ever could.

I've tried to prove it wrong for so long because it's not accepted as a solution. Why do you think I'm on 4chan?

>>11691885
Okay, could you tell me why?
The first message has an image with solution. Try the provided evidence and use that to explain to me why I'm wrong.
This is the very issue I am talking about.
You deny it based on already acquired knowledge to be better without the need to inspect any further.

I don't need or want you to care about cicada. I do though.

It's a geometrical solution to a geometrical issue I solved using nothing but a ruler and a compass.
Unless you can tell me why my solution is wrong, why disrespect the countless hours I spent researching?
Please, try the first image just once.
How can that be a bait?