Is Pi (3.1415926....) a Lie?

Pi is an irrational number, the ratio of the circumference of a circle to to its diameter. I am not sure what it means to suggest that it is a "lie". The ratio can be found to a greater or lesser accuracy by experiment, or by calculation.

. . . I am not sure what it means to suggest that it is a "lie". . .

well, there is really more to it, it sure is NOT
3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510.

What are you trying to say? Of course π is "not" that. It is "not" this either:

This is closer to the truth:
Pi=3.14460551102969314427823434337183571809248823135089…

How did you get that result?

NASA admitted that when the original Mooncraft landing occurred, the targeted spot was missed by about 20km?
What could have been wrong with the Calculations?
NASA subsequently adjusted their traditional mathematical value for Pi (3.141592…) by increasing it in the 3rd decimal by .003!

Also, an ex-Engineer from NASA, "Smokey” admitted (via email) that when he was making metal cylinders for this same Mooncraft, finished parts just did not fit perfectly, so an adjusted value for Pi was also implemented.

What if both an algebraic and a geometric proof existed, both irrefutable evidence that Pi is deliberately deficient, that Pi is a Lie?

Archimedes Fundamental Error:

In all due good respects, we must first honour Archimedes of Syracuse 2,225 years ago, who gave the world his system on how to calculate Pi, approximated to 22÷7, by cutting the circle into say 16 slices of a pizza, and measuring the 16 edge lengths of these 16 triangular polygons (fig 3), to get a good estimate for the circumference of a circle. The idea was that if we kept making the slices of pizza smaller and smaller, by subsequently cutting the circle into 32 slices, then 64, then 128 then 256 slices, we would get a better and more accurate representation for the circumference. The Fundamental Flawed Logic or Error with Archimede’s Increasing Polygon Method was that he failed to measure The Area Under The Curve. In fact, he assumed that The Area Under The Curve, just magically disappeared. Even in his time, Archimedes admitted that his value was a mere estimate!

Ok, lets give more credit to Archimedes and give him a green tick to say that yes, the value of 3.1415… is a good approximation for pi, but it is only an approximation, his logic for that time was commendable, considering that they did not have calculators or computers, so we can say that his Pi is the Limit of Infinite Straight Lines, but does not account for the Area Under The Curve. It has always bothered me, since high school, that we use straight lines to measure a curved circle.

The only thing in the way is the pride and arrogance of mathematicians who cannot conceive of such a notion that Pi could be anything else than what their books have instructed them to believe. It is their lack of understanding of Fractal Harmonics (based on the cascading proportions of the Fibonacci Sequence) which hinders them to comprehend the elegance of the geometric solution known as ]the Fairywand Method identical to Saint Germain’s Maltese Cross. Fractal Harmonics allows us to zoom forever into the Area Under The Curve and detect more infinitesimal Areas Under The Curve, concluding that old Pi is only an approximation, a limit of millions or billions of straight lines, that it is deficient, that the True Value of Pi must be a fraction more than we estimated, and that it must be based on Phi, The Golden Mean Harmonics. Thus 4 divided by the Square Root of Phi (1.272…) gives the correct frequency of 3.144… its really very simple.

This is a lot of ****. You are either deliberately arguing counterfactually to get attention, or else you really believe that "Vedic" crap, either way you are wasting our time

Often wondered, Cobn, whether it can be proven irrational.

This is a lot of ****. You are either deliberately arguing counterfactually to get attention, or else you really believe that "Vedic" crap, either way you are wasting our time.