Φπ² = 16

[nothing]

I'm not expecting many to see the significance of this, at least at this time,
as many would probably prefer to continue to "believe" the mainstream
and would never dare to think the mainstream might be wrong.
Belief in authority seems to rule all. Regardless:

As from Adam's own rib is derived Eve,
so from Φ's own 'rib' is derived π.

The former is known as the golden section,
the latter, however, is hitherto not known,
but rather merely believed to be
of some "transcendental" nature as 3.14159...
due to being a mere approximation.

π transcends not unless
her likeness is de-coupled
from her own co-operative Φ, as
they are both meant to be
co-operator and co-creator.

Φ can be expressed in terms of π:
(π+π√5)/2π = Φ
(3π+π√5)/2π = Φ²
=(Φ + 1)
etc.

Thus π must also be able
to be expressed in terms of Φ.


______________________________________________________
Begin with a circle whose diameter is √5 and place two unit squares
inside the circle side-by-side, either horizontally or vertically (latter shown)
and connect any two opposite corners (shown AB) thus finding the describing line
to be √5. Extend AB by +1 unit (BC shown) and find the middle (D)
such to satisfy (1+√5)/2 shown as (BC + AB) / (D).
Find that by rotating AC about the origin, point D draws a related circle
which "kisses" the corresponding unit square 4 times equidistantly,
thus a precise π can be found without the need for approximation
expressed as an integer ratio of 4/√Φ.

By squaring π = 4/√Φ one recovers
π² = 16/Φ
thus conforms to Einstein's
E = MC²
16 = Φπ²

So why has present-day humanity de-coupled π from Φ?
One might as well ask why Adam and Eve were separated
and/or why man and woman were/are cast out of Eden:
the same is ignorantly de-coupling primordial yang and yin
such to ignore what Φ is to image (1D), π² is to likeness (2D).
In other words: the answer is naught but human ignorance.

The Giza pyramid uses the same 1/√Φ/Φ triangle:

to encode and preserve this primordial relationship.

The correct π is thus
not transcendental -
it is a root of f(x) = x⁴ - 16x² - 256
and since Φ resolves the quadratic
x² - x = 1, Φπ² = 16 captures
the unification of-and-between
the primordial yang and yin: be they
space and time, image and likeness,
Adam (man) and Eve (woman),
electricity and magnetism etc.
all such relationships are naught
but expressions of the same function
described by the timeless Φπ² = 16.

Implications and utility to follow ...

[nothing]

What is interesting is '4' transcends all space and time
given the Fib. sequence 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8... '4' is skipped
as it denotes a transcendental universal axes
as universally bestowed and locally employed:

with Φ and π being all that is needed
to construct an encircled pentagram/body:

which allows the axes of '4' to be plotted onto the arms and legs:
{universal operators} as {all/not} (alpha/omega, as a null binary capturing all binaries)
{universal roots} as {beg/end} (as a null binary capturing all and/or not space-time phenomena)
whose local usage is the apex (ie. the sole discretion) of the being concerned/employing.

What this means is each person is practically their own axes:
operators{alpha/omega} + roots{beg/end} + will =√5
thus can be expressed in terms of space (s) over time (t)

wherein the universal roots of {beg/end} can concern the roots of not only any physical space-time phenomena,
but all metaphysical phenomena that transcends space and time (ie. physicality) entirely.

{Alpha} and {Omega} thus juxtapose
{True} and {Not necessarily}
as scales which weigh/measure according
to the accuracy/precision of the one measuring.

[wtf]

Φπ² = 16

This cannot be, because it implies that phi = 16/pi^2. But the left side is algebraic and the right side is transcendental. Those are mutually exclusive classes of real numbers. I'm not sure why you are unable to comprehend this simple fact.

Wolfram alpha gives 15.96935537647813196458917012122813849984820082632269006230...
which as you can see is close to but not the same as 16.

[nothing]

This cannot be, because it implies that phi = 16/pi^2. But the left side is algebraic and the right side is transcendental.

You obviously missed:

The correct π is thus
not transcendental -
it is a root of f(x) = x⁴ - 16x² - 256
and since Φ resolves the quadratic
x² - x - 1 = 0 ...

and obviously miss the main point entirely:
that π is actually not transcendental,
it is naturally coupled to Φ (thus geometric)
and only is "transcendental" because present-day humanity
ignorantly "approximates" it, rather than comprehending
that a precise π can be derived by way of Φ.

The argument "but π is transcendental..."
is the root/barrier of such ignorance.

Those are mutually exclusive classes of real numbers. I'm not sure why you are unable to comprehend this simple fact.

4/√Φ has both: two real and two imaginary roots:

thus 4/√Φ as π, in conjunction with Φ (for being coupled to it),
cooperatively produce two 'real' and two 'imaginary' results
all concerning the whole integer '16'.

This '16' is actually the unfolding of a 4x4 matrix comprised of
a 2x2 transcendental universal axes composed of the following:

{alpha/omega} as universal operators +all and -not
{beg/end} as universal roots +causation and -cessation
the nature of which is space- and/or time-invariant,
thus transcends both (hence transcendental).

Wolfram alpha gives 15.96935537647813196458917012122813849984820082632269006230...
which as you can see is close to but not the same as 16.

I don't worship the Wolfram god (ie. defer any authority to it).

There is a major difference between a length and a distance:
the former is static whereas the latter implies time as a constituency,
thus whereas the former is a single static metric, the latter is two metrics
expressed as a ratio of space over time, as velocity, thus v = s/t.
It is for this reason that any/all disregard for kinematics
(ie. we live in a universe of motion) will render π as transcendental:
the only "transcendental" nature of it owing to the "approximation" of it
transcending the limit of present-day human intelligence
(ie. human ignorance "transcends" discretionary rationalization).

See the following why π must be 4 in all kinematic situations. The author of these papers,
while highly intelligent, does not intuit the implicit relation of π to Φ, however the '4'
implicitly concerns the root of the latter, given all is constructed thereupon.

http://milesmathis.com/pi3.html (short version)
http://milesmathis.com/pi2.html (long version)

Abstract: I show that in all kinematic situations, π is 4... this paper applies to kinematic situations, not to static or geometric situations. I am analyzing the equivalent of an orbit, which is caused by motion and includes the time variable. In that situation, π becomes 4. I will also remind you this is not just a theory: it has been indicated by many mainstream experiments, including rocketry tests and quantum experiments...
-Miles Mathis, The Extinction of π

[wtf]

You obviously missed:

We'll have to agree to disagree. You persist in stating a mathematical impossibility. I can't argue with that.

[nothing]

You obviously missed:

We'll have to agree to disagree. You persist in stating a mathematical impossibility. I can't argue with that.

The accuser is the accused.

You persist in stating a mathematical possibility is an "impossibility".

I can't argue with that.

...unless you can state any condition(s) (if any) that renders it "impossible" by necessity
without deferring back to "pie is transcendenal" already addressed:
pi is not necessarily transcendental - it is not only transcendental,
it is also real: anything coupled to Φ resolves into something real
thus it has four valid roots, two real and two imaginary, all in relation to 16...

we'll have to agree to disagree...

Arguing π is transcendental despite being coupled to Φ
is the same as arguing Φ itself is transcendental.
If Φ transcends not, and is naturally coupled to π,
wherever Φ becomes real/geometric, π does along with.
They are co-creative, yet relate to one another
by way of 16. Sweet 16, as Leedskalnin said.

Just because π is on one side and Φ the other
does not mean they are de-coupled if/when re-arranged.
The coupling is natural: π contains Φ as part of its constituency
because numbers are not only quantitative (image):
they are qualitative (likeness) containing intrinsic qualities
that "transcends" what humans themselves imbue them with
and/or mere quantity: that is only half the constituency.