Research Article
Morina E
Abstract
This paper addresses several topics in mathematics and in particular it aims to answer the following questions: Why is it that the π value cannot be π=3.1415. Why should this value be different? Where can one notice the wrong calculations and its effects? Based on the results obtained, we conclude that the value 3.1415 is a value that does not respond to reality and does not give correct results. The reasons for this conclusion are mentioned several times and appropriate arguments are presented. For the sake of truth this value should be different, and at the same time should no longer continue to be used. Contradictions in the 3.1415 value first began in the Geomechanical laboratory during calculations where this value always provided wrong results. In direct analysis where cutting cohesion and tangent are required, the surface of the sample which enters the apparatus for analysis is of the size d=71 mm r=35.5 mm. When this area is estimated according the principles of Archimedes a smaller surface is obtained, the result is 39.57 cm2 and when this area is calculated according to the 3.24 value then we obtain an area of 40.83 cm2 which is represented as 39.57 cm2 therefore cohesion and tangent are erroneous results in this analysis. The next error is the analysis of suppression (compression). Where the frame of the apparatus have the measure of sample size d=71 mm, r=35.5 mm which is compressed and one can later discover the degree of sample deformation. The mistake lies in that the real sample in the framework of the apparatus is 40.83 cm2 , while we calculate the value of the surface as 39.57 cm2 . Review of soil analysis is also mistaken. When the sample with the size Ø 50 mm and length 100 mm is subject to the vertical force until it breaks, the resulting resisting force does not belong to the sample that lies in the frame of the apparatus