R. Feynmans Mass Question

Author: mustardness

Posts

Total: 25
Topic's author
#1
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
206.7572826 ismuon-electron mass

206.7572826 minus 0.511{ electron mass } = 206.2462826

Electron { 0.511 } repeats itself { 0.511 } plus 206.2462826 

Feynmans question to self, was, why does the mass of the electron repeat itself at approximately at 206.7572826?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pi = 3.14 and 66 is value of the number of relationships between 12 vertexes in 3D { \Y/  } or 12 nodal points in 2D {  V }.

Pi { 3.133 approximation } * 66 = 206.778  is approximate to  mass of the muon-electron

Pi { 3.125 approximation } * 66 = 206.514 approximate to the increased mass value of electron

0.008 is differrence between two Pi approximates and 0.016 59 26 53 58 97 932384626433832795 is differrence between Pi { 3.14 } and 3.125
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 62 7 66  802998

Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 = 66.4 { Pi-Time }

Pi^4/4{ re-normalization } =  24.35 22 7 27 585 00 60 9309110083172176
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Relationship to great circles ---ergo Pi--   of torus and specifically the four level/line, numerically sequential, spiral helix with inversion-outversion at from peaks of outer an inner surface of curvature. (><)(><) LINK








Topic's author
#2
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }.
...James Bond { 007 } even at the quantum scales of existence...

Here above I chose to reduce Pi-value { 3.14 } or any approximate Pi-value ---ex 3.11---, rather than reduce my Pi-Time value of  66.4.

I.e. Ive reduced the approximated Pi-ratio of 3.11 used to get muon-electon mass value---   by a factor of 3.1 to arrive at 0.0077.

So what does it mean, to reduce Pi or any Pi associated value?  Pi is not a size consideration so I cannot just say were looking at something that more and more micro in size.

Can we say that the ratio reduction is related to some portion of the circumference of a circle, that is not accounted for as an actual { completed } circumferential value?

I believe we can do this and in actuality, is what I do with my linear, numiercal, spiral helixed torus, that, has at minimum two kinds of primary great circles (  )(  ) horizontal { side } view and ((  )) birds-eye{ top }-view of a torus.

More on those specifics later.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 62 7 66  802998
...5-fold icosa{20}hedron has 31 left and right skew primary great axi-spun circles/polygons { or tori  } LINK .....

Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus the 31 { XYZ } = 66.4 { Pi-Time }

Pi^4/4{ re-normalization } =  24.35 22 7 27 585 00 60 9309110083172176
....4-fold cubo{6}octa{8}hedron has 24 surface chords/edges LINK .....

Topic's author
#3
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
I believe we can do this and in actuality, is what I do with my linear, numiercal, spiral helixed torus, that, has at minimum two kinds of primary great circles (  )(  ) horizontal { side } view and ((  )) birds-eye{ top }-view of a torus.
This set of two primary kinds of great circle of torus, are at 90 degrees to each other.  Ergo the horizontal and vertical are at 90 degrees to each other.

Yes from a cosmic perspective there is no horizontal or vertical of any cosmically conceptual torus, there is only the 90 degree-ness relationship to those two viewpoints.



Topic's author
#4
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }.
Previously I presented to kinds of great circle associated with a torus;

1 } (  )(  )  is two equatorial { great } cross  sectional planes of  the tube --not whole torus--  so either one is great circle,

2} (   (   (   )  )  ) the central inside the tube great circle plane divides the whole torus into two equal halves

How the greatly reduced Pi, 0.007 is applied to a torus is difficult to make sense of, in a rational, logical common sense way. The most practical conclusion Ive arrived at is to see how Pi-time 66. 4 is applied.

What I came to is to think of --for starters---  is that my numerical based spiral helixed torus has 66.4 revolutions around the tube before in the process of creating a whole torus.

/ / / / / / / / / /  / / / / / / / / / /  / / = 22

/ / / / / / / / / /  / / / / / / / / / /   / / = 22

/ / / / / / / / / /  / / / / / / / / / /   / / = 22

...............................................= 66 total

The .4 means that the spiral inverts --inside the tube---  before making 67th revolution. I break this above into three sections of 22, because  my geometric Standard Model associates the electron with the three great circles{ planes } of the octa{8}hedron, that are each perpendicular { 90 degrees }  to the other.

It may be too early to bring this into view, but in Synergetics we see that the octahedron as developed  by the VE/jitterbug process, is actually composed of three sets of double-bonded/valenced great circles or planes ergo a set of 6 great circles or planes define the octahedral electron that is composed of 12 sets of two double-bonded/valenced vectorial edges.  LINK
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 62 7 66  802998
.....................................7 is in the  overall 7th position.....

Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 = 66.4 { Pi-Time }

Pi^4/4{ re-normalization to XYZ- 3D } =  24.35 22 7 27 585 00 60 9309110083172176
...............................................................................7 is in overall 7th position............

A regular heptagon { 7 sided regular/symmetrical polygon } has 7 irrational internal-external angles { 128.57 }, unlike many other regular polygons.


Topic's author
#5
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 and that is close to 0.511 { electron mass }
Previously we divided 66.4 revolutions of the tube of a numerical torus, by three great circles/planes associated with octahedron, to arrive at the value 22.133. 66.4 / 3 = 22.133

Next we reconsider the double-bonded/valenced octahedron ergo six great circles/planes and  arrive at 11.066 via 66.4 revolutions divided by 6.

I'm not sure this latter above is a crucial step for consideration. What may be more crucial, is how the mechanisms of an electron are defined by the revolutions --based on three---   and those revolutions along with their inversion-outversions creating the fuzzy cloud of electron uncertainty.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Related considerations

Pi^3{ XYZ } = 31.00 62 7 66  802998
.....................................7 is in the  overall 7th position.....

Pi^4{ XYZ + time }, minus 31 = 66.4 { Pi-Time }

Pi^4/4{ re-normalization to XYZ- 3D } =  24.35 22 7 27 585 00 60 9309110083172176
...............................................................................7 is in overall 7th position............

A regular heptagon { 7 sided regular/symmetrical polygon } has 7 irrational internal-external angles { 128.57 }, unlike many other regular polygons.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
...."An electron bound in a hydrogen atom takes on various shapes depending on its energy, such as shown here in this physically-accurate mathematical plot. Note that this image shows a single electron. Each of the white spots is one of the peaks of the electron's wavefunction. Public Domain Image, source: Christopher S. Baird."....

11 days later

Topic's author
#6
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
0.028 59 26 535897932384626433832795

The above value is the differrence Pi { 3.14 etc } and 3.113 { used to calculate electron mass0.511 mass }.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approimate electron-muon mass

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass

3.1053 is the differrence between  3.113  and 0.0077

3.13 38 92 6535897932384626433832795 is diffferrence betwee 3.14 and 0.0077

What I'm looking for is a rational, logical way to adjust Pi instead of adjusting 66.4 revolutions of torus, in regards to my  numerical torus.

I previous I saw no rational way to incorporate these variations of Pi into my numerical torus.  So this is why I'm reviewing the above info to clarify to self how I got here in hopes of seeing a Pi-like relationship  forward in regards to the torus that does not adjust mess with the 66.4. 





23 days later

Topic's author
#7
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
What I'm looking for is a rational, logical way to adjust Pi instead of adjusting 66.4 revolutions of torus, in regards to my  numerical torus
Actually not looking for way to " adjust ", I'm actually looking for way to justify the accounting Ive already identified, within context of my numerical, inverted-outverted torus, or some integral set of three or more great tori.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate electron-muon mass

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass

More inversions associated with torus would seem to create a greater mass ergo adjusting to a higher set { frequency } of inversions { (><)(><) }  to arrive the lesser Pi-value 0.00077 does not seem correct pathway.

What if the Pi-value and my adjusted Pi-value of 3.113 is somehow associated something else Ive not yet considered. Ex what if the adjusted Pi-value 3.113 is associated to some greater number of tori. Ex let the greater number of tori be 206.7032 or even higher.

Then we can have the adjusted Pi-value 0.0077 can be more likened to a lesser number of tori.

The question becomes what is the number of tori for a unit value of 1, relative to 0.0077?

The differrence between 1 and 0.0077 is 0.9923.

If 0.0077 is equal to 3 great tori, then multiply 3 by 0.9923 to find our base unity of tori. Yes?

I say three because that is correlates to my past years of associating the electron with the contracted cubo-octahedron as an octahedron ergo three great planes.

3{ tori } * 0.923 = 2.9769...H.mmm?









Topic's author
#8
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
Tried something new in regards to the following operations, in trying to find how the 0.0077 would associate to  three of my helix-based numerical tori of an octahedron.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate electron-muon mass ...{ this latter begin the value  R Feynman says ever physicist has on his wall }......

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass is ok but does not associate rationally with even one whole numerical torus much less three, ergo I tried something new and got a surprise value.

8623.3 7 66 2 33 7 66 2 33 7 66 2 33 7 66 233766

So this operation of dividing 66.6 ---revolutions of helix around the tube of whole torus?--- gave me the above value. Not sure what to do with it, but I at least get a rational whole number set { 8632  } that may some how relate-able to helix based numerical torus.

Anyway that 862 and 3.3 7 66 2 33 7 66 would pop out takes me back to;

Pi^3 = 31.00 62 7 66 80

even tho there is no 33 in the latter value.

#9
Vader
Vader's avatar
Debates: 30
Posts: 14,984
5
8
11
Vader's avatar
Vader
5
8
11
i hate chemistry. my teacher was a lazy prick and never taught. i never liked chemsitry and now i know it is waste of my time
Topic's author
#10
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@Vader
i hate chemistry. my teacher was a lazy prick and never taught. i never liked chemsitry and now i know it is waste of my time
I love cosmic stuff and never had any outstanding teachers of science that said anything I can remmember. I recall one science teacher talking more about the next world war starting in the middle east and he was stating this in 1968.

What I'm considering in this thread is theoretical speculations in regards to sub-atomic physics and not molecular chemistry i.e.  interactions between atoms in molecular configurations.

Topic's author
#11
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
86 23.3766 233766 233766 233766 2337 66

So we have 8000 and 600 before we get to the repeating 23.766.

So that is 86 hundred and perhaps we can add in 23 as some percentage of 8600.

What just occurred to me was any possible associations to the 87 great circles LINK  combination of the;

25 primary  great circle planes/polygons 4-fold cubo-octahedron and,
62 via 31 left and right set  of icosahedrons primary set  great circle planes/polygons.

So 87 * 100 = 8700. Minus 100 = 8600

What percentage of 8623 is the value 23? H,mmm not sure where any this leads or of significance.




Topic's author
#12
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
What percentage of 8623 is the value 23?
0.27% i.e. less than 1%

So 87 minus 100 arrives at 8600 with 027% being negligible{?}.

100 is 1.1627906976744% of 8600. So would such a 1.62790 be of any meaning in these lines of thought?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

86 23.3766 233766 233766 233766 2337 66

So we have 8000 and 600 before we get to the repeating 23.766.

So that is 86 hundred and perhaps we can add in 23 as some percentage of 8600.

What just occurred to me was any possible associations to the 87 great circles LINK  combination of the;

25 primary  great circle planes/polygons 4-fold cubo-octahedron and,
62 via 31 left and right set  of icosahedrons primary set  great circle planes/polygons.

So 87 * 100 = 8700. Minus 100 = 8600

31 days later

Topic's author
#13
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
First, as always, a review of how we got here.

3.14 = Pi

3.113 * 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate muon-electron mass ...{ this latter being the value  R P. Feynman says ever physicist has on his wall }......

0.0077 * 66.4 = 0.511 28 approximate electron mass is ok but does not associate rationally { whole number of tori } with even one whole numerical torus much less three, ergo I tried something new and got a surprise value.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 8623.37 66 233766 233766 233766 233766

Yes, it is an interesting number as far as the 86 being close to the primary set of 87 great circle planes LINK but what to do with it, if anything.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The difference between 1 and 0.0077 is 0.9923.

The differrence between 1 and 0.511 is 0.489.

66.4 is an ultra{ extreme }-abstract resultant of Pi^4 - 31{ XYZ ergo 3D } automatically associate it with 66.4 revolutions ergo 66.4 inversions (>< ) of a single helically defined torus. Does that make 66.4 an absolute?  A static absolute, that, we have to convert to a more dynamic { physical } and known{?} value ex 2nd powering of speed-of-radiation? Or whatever.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Topic's author
#14
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
.0.0077 .....* 66.4 = 0.51128 electron mass

.3.113.........* 66.4 = 206.7032 approximate muon-electron mass

26.61 26 5  * 66.4 = 1767.038 and approximate mass of tau-electron?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 8623.37 66 233766 233766 233766 233766

8,623.37 66 233766 233766 233766 233766

8,623 - 2,000 = 6623
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 / 3.113 = 21.32 99 06 84 22 74 33344041117892708 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

66.4 / 26.6126 = 2.49 50 58 73 15782749524661250685765




#15
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
I am fine with Honors Chem, but AP Chem is hard, and I got above average on the ACS exam.
Topic's author
#16
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
Diameter of hydrogen is 1.06 * 10 to negative 10. i.e. 1.06 * 0.1 = 0.106m and that is the value I will begin with via the torus for diameter { <--D--> } of electron.

This 0.106 is the value of the diameter of the larger circle of my numerical torus. So we want to use half of that value ---ergo 0.053--- to attain the radius { R--> } and then the resultant surface area of one torus that may be involved with the hydrogen's, single electron, fuzzy cloud.

0.053 * 12.56637061{ R--> }... = 0.66601764233

The calculation can be done differrent ways with differrent kinds of radii being used.  I'm going with this following pathway since it does the math for me if I can properly assign their radii to my nunierlcal tori.  I also like this method because it approximates what I believe the tubes radius to be, however, it does subtract the value of diameter of hydrogen atoms single proton.

I assume my numerical torus inside inner radius  ---via the following link--- begins at the outside surface of diameter of the single hydrogen proton ergo I will have to double the value of the inner radius in the following link so as the inner circle of the diagram.

S = π2 * (R2 - r2) LINK to calculator that does the math for us.

R{ R--> } = 0.053
r{ r--> } = 0.0 minus radius of proton and we will exclude proton values for following resultants

and the resultant surface area for my numerical torus is 0.02772372 ---and that value includes protons diameter---.

Next I need to establish a connection/asssociation to Pi-Time 66.4 ie. 66.4 revolutions { inversions } and subtract that from volume{?}?

And this may lead to most abstract --if not irrelevant---, yet definitive Pi-Time of a single electron

Topic's author
#17
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
Intersecting tori of only one type of intersection between outer surface and nuclear centers ( <---)---->


66.4 { revolutions within helical torus? } / 0.0077 = 8623.37 66 233766 233766 233766 233766

LINK for 87 great circle/polygonal planes

8,623.37 66 233766 233766 233766 233766

8,623 - 2,000 = 6623



#18
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
So... what's the question
Topic's author
#19
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
-->
@WaterPhoenix
see #1 post if you want to better inform yourself, for starters.

.."Feynmans question to self, was, why does the mass of the electron repeat itself at approximately at 206.7572826?"....

Then read through the other posts if want to really follow the paths Ive been researching for some years now.

Topic's author
#20
mustardness
mustardness's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,979
2
2
3
mustardness's avatar
mustardness
2
2
3
Correcting #16 post with the below NOT.

..."The calculation can be done differrent ways with differrent kinds of radii being used.  I'm going with this following pathway since it does the math for me if I can properly assign their radii to my nunierlcal tori.  I also like this method because it approximates what I believe the tubes radius to be, however, it does NOT subtract the value of diameter of hydrogen atoms single proton."...

and the resultant surface area for my numerical torus is 0.02772372 ---and that value includes protons diameter---.

40 days later

#21
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,060
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Mass vs Matter

....."As we all know, “matter” is defined as “anything that occupies space and has mass,” and “mass” is defined as “something that represents the amount of matter in a particular space, particle or object.”

In terms of features, matter can be seen while mass cannot. It is only quantifiable."..




#22
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,060
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Mind Over Matter { if not also mass }

Well, we have scietific evidence for placebo effect occurring in some 10% of experiements.

Here is another set of experiements I never heard of.


79 days later

#23
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,060
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
MInd over matter is one thing

Geodesic Space (  )(  ) phenomena over fermionic matter ( * )( * ) is another.

10 days later

#24
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,060
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Why does the electron { mass 0.511 } integrity, repeat itself as the muon electronintegrity mass, approximately 206.757?

And then it repeats again as the tau electron integrity so again we ask why?

Electron { lepton lite } > Muon { lepton medium } > Tau { lepton heavy }

And that is a trinity. And it has its anti-particle trinity as its complementary opposite charged version of same trinity.

So why the trinity?

So why the anti-particles of opposite charge? Why this symmetry between the two sets?

123, ABC, thats how easy Universe can be.....sung to M. Jackson and jackson 5 song

25 days later

#25
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,060
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Pi^4{ 3D + time } this one is suspect for valididty when consider the 4th-D as inherently time only value{ more at bottom of page }

Fist tho, here is my original { older } process and concludion for determining an abstract cosmic time value

Pi^4 { 4D } - 4 = ‭24.35 22 7 27.....
..this latter above is my process of renormalizing 4D{ as spatial only }  as a time value only.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is it a valid process to consider time in the above Pi^4{ 3D + t } instead of considering it as a hyper-dimension?

Considering the 4th-Dimension ---as Micho Kaku does ihis book" Hyper-space"---as the internal diagonal { / } of a cartesian based XYZ cube, then that volumetric { not surface } diagonal { / } is INward towards the center of cube.  This is significant to me because of what I came to later in life.

My numerical based torus creates reality as sine-wave via INward --- (><)(><) --  inversions from the peak of positive ( ) curvature and peak of negative )( curvature of my 4 line/level numerical based torus.

Observed Time reality is the INversions from outer and inner surfaces --(><)(><)-- to create our sine-wave { /\/\/ } patterned association to physical reality.

‭Pi^4{ 4D } = 97.409091034002437236440332688705‬

Pi^4 { 4D } - 31{ 3D } = ‭66.4 09 09 10 34 00 24.........