AuT-pp: dimension examined 3 of whatever check for inclusion

So it isn't my goal in all of this to undermine anything.  The fact that the indications on the grand design is the solution to a fairly simple math problem was not an intended consequence, even though determing origins an explaining things like black holes and big bangs was.
Another bit of irony is that the only way I can get recognition for what I've done is to prove recognition is irrelevant.   Worse still, a quantum step forward in understanding appears to nothing more than a push towards a massive compression or decompression state (think fission or fusion) localized to the environment where I have an effect.
while the obvious solution is to stop writing and destroy all evidence of my work; that assumes the existence of some monster presence that hasn't already fully comprehended and planned (as a solution to the relatively simple algorithm that defines me)  each step.  Were we, as people capable of rational thought (don't look at history and tell me are and evolution is something of a myth and an understatement under the supersymetry of AuT) the algorithm would still have its way easily via a supernova, meteor, stream of energy from a black hole or any of the other ways in which it can have planned from the beginning of clock time (actually before that by some large factor of x) to deal with pesky rock mites like us.
It's the ultimate horror movie, not unlike the matrix, but without the ability to reprogram things.
So, I will, as the universe slowly removes the various aspects of my lease on life that allows me to contribute, continue to trace this formula back to its origins.

Zero an g-space

The question of zero in curvature is addressed here.  While the numbers below have some relevance, the truth of the matter is that the decreasing amount of information allows for the solution to converge according to the 0 factor described in the prior post.
The convergence on 3.142-3.143 allows us to generate the sin curve approximation.  This solution (quantum states) is the result of needing an exact solution at any quantum moment for curvature which in turn required that distance be replaced with information.  EHT, Einstein's version of AuT, would have had a set value of x andd each big bang would result from the same amount of information.  It took a while (two years?) for AuT to see the absurity of that result even though the infinite series loops of interesecting F-series spirals appear very early in the process.  What a battle it was to admit those functioned according to math instead of some Einsteinian design.
The convergence of for a numerator 1 pi likewise converges according to a different series, converges on .87 and .72 and in between these are other converging series.  The amount of curvature is much greater as these solutions increase and the convergence is much greater for successive spirals in terms of origin.
2 converges between 1.9 and 1.6
3 converges between 2.6 and 2.1
What is common, aside from the denominator being the denominator is that the infinite series comes form a zero funciton that looks like this:
pi=n(sum(1 to x)[(-1)^(x+1)]/(2x-1)
In this equation, 0 is replaced with the operative formula (-1)^(x+1) to shift between odd and even results.  This suggests that the equation under AuT could look like this:
pi=n(sum(1 to x)0'[1/(2x-1)] which in turn suggests that 0'=(-1)^(x+1) over any summation of x when applied to F-series equations.
In pre AuT math, that would be enough, but not in AuT.  It's a little closer to say this:
An equation vibrating between 1 and -1 can be represented in a positive universe by (-1)^(x+1); but how about the negative spirals that come to exist?
This critical difference is why when we try to apply our math to the universe we can "band-aid" things together, but we're not getting the right answer.  While for some limited purposes, defining the pi equation for example,  we can substitute a formula for pi, in terms of providing a solution you actually need two uses of 0' in this format, one for the derivation of the geo function and a second one for the creation of negative offset spirals based on a current solution to pi, but alternating between positive and negative results which can extend out according to the F-series.
In the latter case, "direction" (positive or negative) remains fixed as a negative while in the former it continues to evolve as the amount of information increases at least within a closed system although as indicated, pi changes radically and based on compressive and proximity of solution factors.
This is not the same thing, of course, as saying that 0' is the same for every application in g-space or in o-space since it changes in either direction.
Since we deal with a very large value of x in different versions of this equation, the two appear to have the same effective quality.  What is obvious, however, is that 0' is not at all nothing.
Fractions are different from 0' states and even those have some problems.

A similar problem can be seen in these pictures which show how pi is derived by various changes converging together.  As we know you start out with 4, then add 4/3 then subtract 4/5 and so on.  If the size of space time is the same, then each time you break this down the size of space time must grow so that, for example, the minimum size of 4/15 for pi at the quantum level must be equal to 4/3 pi at the second derivation of pi. Quantum length has to stay at yes/no it cannot get any smaller, so space has to expand to accommodate the definition.

Let’s look at this with the shapes aligned:

As can be seen here the difference (going towards zero as a minimum length is defined between a center and an edge changes slightly with each transition.  Further the Gap (between the straight line between points and the “arc length” which is not really an arc length at all gets “smaller.”  However, if we start at yes/no as the gap distance, there is no gap distances at 4/3.  This is a non-linear environment.  At 4/5 you first get a gap distance which is greater than the distance from the center to edge.

At 4/7 you are beginning to experience space as we understand it with the gap being less than the quantum length.

This close up shows an interesting feature of this problem.  We are focused on a minimum length of the line indicating the length of the gap.  This is considered the quantum minimum size of a leg of the polygon.  The larger circle in each drawing (4/7 they are about the same size) shows the gap between the minimum lengths bisecting the shape and the smaller circle shows the gap between minimum leg length and the point where it intersects the line separating the sides.  In a quantum universe, “gaps” between these distances are not allowed.  Hence a paradox is introduced into geometry even where pi is defined with specificity. We do not see this problem because the size of the circles is small.  The larger circle defines a place where a third quantum line can go which also alleviates the issue.

The point of these figures is that there is an imperfect alignment which either (1) abhors quantum length in which case there is no quantum universe and nothing will ever make much sense or (2) dimensions as we experience them are illusory based on the display of information with gaps between quantum solutions that are progressively eliminated as the amount of information increases which is, after all, what pi requires.

At first blush, the conclusion is that space is linear, which we know to be wrong.  When we look closer, we see that linearity is an illusion.  The numbers which make these features remain quantum numbers, 4/7;4/9;4/11.  The relative positioning of these number begins to build an illusion of space which cannot exist with quantum solutions.  That is, on a quantum level the solution to some equations defining the universe appears to define spaces that cannot exist.

The exact nature of this Greg’s paradox can be described as the difference between two quantum states defines quantum separation by comparison which comparison leaves less than quantum distances between solutions.

One place we can look for explanations lies in the derivative rules:

Product rule (uv)’=u’v+uv’ (deriv of one plus deriv of other) change one at a time.

Quotient rule (u/v)’= (u’v-uv’)/v^2 as long as v not equal to zero
When we look at spirals we tend to oversimplify them and see only addition.  But 4+4+4 is also 3*4 and 3 is 12/4 and any number, including a wildly irrational number (as compared to mildly irrational numbers like pi) like 0'.
While this discussion is very worthwhile, no one else is paying the light bills.