The not transcendental Pi
Of ferman: Fernando Mancebo Rodriguez--- Personal page. ----Spanish pages

You can see many of my works, in the following pages:

Email: ferman25@hotmail.com
Email: ferman30@yahoo.es

A small discussion about the transcendental Pi

In my opinion mathematics is much more than numbers, it is itself the natural and universal language with which you can explain (by measuring) all the events and questions that exist and arise in nature.
And it is so universal that it is valid both on our planet and if we move to any other outside world.
But it also contains and it is built and based on intelligence, logic and philosophy.
Perhaps much more: We could attribute mathematics of being the mother and basis of logic.
Now well, I understand that all these qualities that mathematics possesses go against considering the Pi number as transcendental.
Let's see.
Every regular geometric figure is constructed and measured by its own construction parameters.
Triangle: Base by height, divided by two.
Square: Side squared.
Polygon: Perimeter per apothem divided by two.
Etc., That is, all the geometric figures.
If we try to measure any geometric figure with approximation series, we already know beforehand that we have no chance of arriving at a good and logical solution.
And of course, it must also happen with the circumference and Pi.
But let's see, what is a transcendental number or value?
Well, it is a value not subject to a direct connection or formula to obtain it, but goes beyond any attempt to capture it in an exact and well-defined way.
In other words, it is the indefinite search for a value that we will never achieve.
And my question and consideration when I observe the circumference is simple: I am observing the simplest and easy geometrical figure of all, and its construction only depends on its radius or diameter.
Then to think that the builder (radius) cannot measure what he is building is unacceptable and somewhat ridiculous.
To think that the simplest figure that we have in our sight, is impossible to capture with a direct formula and that its dimension is transcendental (similar to: beyond reality and geometric consistency) lacks logic.
Therefore my conclusion is that the number Pi, (half circumference of radius 1) can't be transcendental.
But even more: No parameter of any regular geometric figure can be transcendental, but measurable with complete accuracy.
Then the question is: Why we use series to find Pi?
Off course, because we don't know to make it in other way
But, we don't have to lie us: With series we never reach the total accuracy.

Another conclusion that I have reached is that:
Transcendental numbers or values are mathematical inventions of humans, and do not exist in nature.
Every natural element, including the Pi, or semi-circumference of r = 1, has a beginning and an end and not an infinite limit.

Goodbye friends.