Thank you. I kind of figured it would be something like that. Most CAD programs use the same value of Pi as Mathematica. I have several goals with this question;
I mainly use Mathematica to calculate a very complex polynomial algorithm and it never donned on me that Pi could have an alternate value. This could explain why physical models of the complex CAD part fails.
It would be nice to run Jain's mathematical proof through Mathematica and see if he is right or not.
It would also be nice to calculate jainPi to the same resolution as he has published.
A programmable way to 'modify' built in Pi and a way to 'revert' back to the original Pi would be nice.
===============
As to 'Changing Pi in Mathematica would mess up a lot of internal calculations.'
This is my point exactly. I ran a simple test on Pi * D = C vs the jainPi * D = C and the difference was significant.
'of course D = Diameter and C = Circumference '
I use C / 360 for a constant in my algorithm. And if the Pi constant is wrong then my constant is wrong.
FYI
Jain claims NASA uses a different value of Pi. But I had another inside source that verified that NASA always had to make course corrections for their space vehicles and could not explain why. Victor Schumberg also had an explanation in that planetary orbits were egg shaped and not truly elliptic.
ps
I hope somebody flames me for referring to Jain. Because he is basically challenging the world on the true value of Pi. He is also challenging Mathematica :)
