AuT-Working on Pi Prime

I managed to catch the "artist's light" this morning. Saying I managed to catch it is a pleasant way of saying I cannot sleep at night.  I do feel, however, that I slept well last night.  First, I'm alone which is nice, second I rode my bike and swam 2500 yards yesterday and third I'm still not drinking any coffee even though I'm two days past my target.   It's just not worth it for me.
The light has now filtered to the middle of the tallest trees, but the clouds behind them are still pink with short wavelengths of light that had to fight through the long air of morning.
The amazing connection between Pi and AuT came out early in my examination of this concept.
nlc part dix-pi, phi and other series converging on information theory  9/9/15
This post, which you can still find, was almost 9 months ago.  I know what you're thinking, not so long ago, but in a 3 year course of study (that's zero to now in 36 months) this post qualifies as pretty early.
The concept I'm exploring with Pi Prime is the idea that for any x pi can be solved even though it's an infinite converging series otherwise.  The other point is that both pi and averaged spirals have a positive and negative aspect (look at the prior post for a review of this).
So you have the possibility that the intersecting spirals are off slightly, by a factor that reflects the infinite series.
Pi converges utilizing a series of increasing numbers according to the formula 1, 3, 5, 7 utilizing the formula 4/1-4/3+4/5-4/7.
The model is that each going in one direction or the other is zeroing in on the 90 degree angle.
To get an incomplete idea say that you have a first "positive spiral" at 1 (call that 12'o'clock on a clock)
The next one is at -3 (that would be 9 o'clock). Then 5 (4 o'clock) then -7 (5 o'clock) then 9 (8 o'clock).  "Why," you ask me, "do you go through this exercise."
The reason is that I have to find the connection between a linear solution that can be solved for any specific number of spirals.  This number is presumably n with the total number of positive (or negative) spirals being n/2 in this series where the denominator is n+2.

This first drawing (top left) shows a "too perfect"overlap.

The second one (below the first) shows an offset of the spirals

Above is the third one that has the potential for an uglier overlap.  This one is "missing" the negative spirals, but you can "see them" just by "reversing every other spiral." I don't have this drawn yet (wait for it) but it will show the clock formulation for the spirals where each one is offset from the one going in the other direction.  In this way you'll get the intersection of a curved spiral, the offset of the middle drawing and the gradual averaging of the third.
The weird thing is that it appears on its own if you look at the inner spirals.  If you look at the "opposite" spirals (count down from the top 3 then 4) these are formed by the early arms of one aligning with the old arms of another.  You'll see a "gap" between where they almost overlap and where one actually passes over another.  It is possible that if this were drawn better there would be two points of overlap forming a triangle.  Triangles are formed between the central point and some of these lines.  I'll probably have to do this in color to look for what is happening.
Of course, the "solution point" where all of these are solved together is far below this "capacitance separation" triangle but we're talking about solving for the entire universe here and concentrating too much on a single point might miss something elegant in the model.
The idea is figure out how curvature and compression interact to better understand stable states and expansion and compression (capacitance and discharge) create the universe we live in.
Anyway, I'll get to it.  That post is taking a lot of time and I'm taking some time off from the technical stuff, but I want to get this done.
Since I'm planning on being in New York anyway, I decided to ask Columbia and NYU if I could give a lecture on my book.  I'm not expecting anything from that.  It's pretty short notice, after all.
Why do it?  Good question, glad you asked.
First, the theory is complete.  Yes, the math isn't worked out.  There are these models to examine in more detail.  But the theory lends itself to answer the questions being asked by these physicists and astrophysicists.  Who else but me knows what came before the big bang (none of those guys apparently).  Who knows why black holes are as big as they are besides me?  Who else knows what a black hole is a black hole and what makes it up besides me?
If I am mad, then the response to my suggestion should be either silence or a "thank you, but no thank you."  If, however, I am not mad, then the response should be something more interesting.
If I'm invited, however, the reason for the lecture may have nothing to do with physics.  There is another, more important lesson (which I stole from Buchminister Fuller who I saw lecture in 1978 or thereabouts).  You'll have to come to the lecture, however, to get it.