As long as we are discussing which dimensions are to be used in your formula, you might want to explain how much tail feathers contribute to body mass, and why you included their length, while rejecting wingspan. Just curious. The only objects that scale correctly with your formula are spheres and polyhedrons that can be mathematically approximated by spheres.
I showed you and extreme example of how simple measurements don’t scale up. Now it is your turn to show the exact measurements used to calculate the body mass of dinosaurs. let’s see the actual calculations.
As to whether teratorns could fly, your calculations of energy requirements are rubbish. Gliding birds may require a significant amount of headwind in order to take off, but once aloft, they seldom flap. Some are not able to take off at all without a headwind.
This leaves unanswered the question of how much time the largest teratorns may have spent flying, and whether flying was a significant component of their hunting.
All these speculations are interesting,, but they hardly add up to evidence to overthrow two centuries of physics.
Simple. I could not find anything that gave the measurements of the Chestnut Sparrow's or for Condor's actual body size minus the tail feathers... but the tail feathers of Eagles and Condors appear to be approximately the same proportion of body length as the Chestnut Sparrow from all of the pictures I found of all three. And I did look, seeking the information of the actual featherless body dimensions.
However, if the tails feathers extended the body length by the same proportion on both Condors and C. Sparrows, then I could go ahead and use the overall length for the calculations. I found that the tail feathers of both the C.S. and the Condors were approximately 1/4 to 1/3 of the body length and appeared to be proportionately about the same on both species. Any observational difference errors may account for the slight over-weight of the calculations of the scaled up C. Sparrow although several descriptions for the C. Sparrow mentioned it being a "chunky" bird for its size, so either could be the case.
If, however, the tail feathers were like those of a parakeet (tail feathers equal body length) or Peacocks (tail feathers can be two to three times body length) then obviously I could not have used that figure for the Square Cube Law calculations. The body length is certainly better than using Wing Span.
As to whether teratorns could fly, your calculations of energy requirements are rubbish. Gliding birds may require a significant amount of headwind in order to take off, but once aloft, they seldom flap. Some are not able to take off at all without a headwind.
No, they are not... nor are they MY calculations. They come from a peer-reviewed article by an aeronautical engineer. I have seen California Condors take off from a standing position... and even Gooney Birds can do so... but prefer not to. The calculations show that even the smallest of Teratorns could not have done so.
This leaves unanswered the question of how much time the largest teratorns may have spent flying, and whether flying was a significant component of their hunting.
Of course the lifestyle of extinct animals is only theoretical... but certain things can be learned from their body adaptations... and it is likely that teratorns hunted like Eagles rather than as carrion eaters like Condors. Their body styles are closer to Eagles with talons designed not for walking (or running...) but rather for an attack from the air.