"The Pi squared cycle is a circuit or mathematical cycle to verify the accuracy of the number Pi that we apply.
Geometrically we suppose that we make circulate the value of Pi squared (little ball in the roulette wheel), increasing exponentially in each turn the possible inaccuracies of this value, in such a way that if the applied Pi is exact, the circuit remains invariable; but if the applied Pi is not accurate, the circuit will wobble and be quickly destroyed."

First Part.

The Pi Squared Cycle: Roulette or Pi Trap.

Accuracy test.

Preamble:

As we can see in the drawing, the effectiveness of this Pi squared cycle is very high, since although the algorithmic Pi currently used is very approximate, when we submit it to the Pi squared cycle test, already for the fourth return to the cycle is destroyed and out of the loop.
And if we use only the approximate value of Pi = 3.14, the value of the cycle (Pi^2) is destroyed in the first loop.
On the other hand, the Squaring Pi remains intact, which in my point of view is a clear demonstration of its validity.

Second Part.

Bending squares to get their inscribed circumferences

As some of you tell me that you are interested in the philosophy and logic of my formulas to obtain Pi, I will summarize the fundamentals:
My idea and formulas to obtain the number Pi consist of doubling rectilinear parameters of the circumference (diameter, inscribed square, circumscribed square, etc.) by means of powers and roots of these parameters, until obtaining the appropriate curve of the number Pi.
Now, another practice way to proceed is to choose an upper square with side Pi (Pi squared) and reduce it to the square circumscribed to the circumference (8), and reversing this process applying a simple formula to adjust the number Pi exactly.
In the drawing I show you a way of explaining it, where a larger square with side Pi is supposedly subjected to powers and roots until it becomes the square circumscribed to the circumference, and from here, doing the inverse operation we can obtain the number Pi.

From my point of view, the currently used algorithmic number Pi is superseded and outdated by multiple tests and application of mathematical logic.
In other words, it is not acceptable in our time (in my opinion, of course) that formulas for obtaining and constructing the number Pi based on its construction parameters are not accepted, and yet continue to use an algorithmic series with the certainty that they are correct.
For me the evidence is compelling due to its quantity and clarity of application.
For example, the drawing that I put, as well as the video that I send you so that you can review it if you have time.
In the drawing, it is expressed that the relationship between the number Pi and the diagonal of its inscribed square (interrelation module) must be obtained from each other by mathematical logic.
If you observe this obtaining, you will see that the Pi quadrant that I expose does comply with these perspectives. Instead the algorithmic Pi fails.
Therefore and for me the question of mathematical logic that we should ask ourselves can be:
Can a false number (mine) united, structure and interrelate with formulas all the construction parameters of the circumference, while the current algorithmic Pi cannot?

(*) From the Circumscription Theorem:

In this diagram we see how all the circumferences and squares circumscribed on a first given circumference can be accurately measured by exponential formulas of the squaring Pi, and how the adjustment with the algorithmic Pi progressively deviates.

Here another simple way of obtain the Squaring Pi in function of its construction parameters.