If you're trying to say that by pixel pitch alone that a 65 inch 4k screen has the same visual fidelity as a 32" 1080p screen then I'm afraid you've discredited your entire argument, because that's absurd. Plenty of others here with a big screen at 4k that will tell you otherwise. I myself have a 27 inch 1080p office screen and my 65" 4k LG has far better pixel clarity at 4-5 feet running the same game. My favorite example is Witcher 3 gwent cards. So much more razor sharp details in the card backgrounds that you can see at 4k that is simply not visible at 1080p.
Agreed. Simply inputting numbers into a pixel density calculator doesn't tell the whole story. It's not that simple.
In my own case, I have a 49" Sony 900F 4k and had a 24" 1080P IPS monitor. When I first got the TV (on the wall in front of my desk), I had the 1080P monitor on my desk for a while. The monitor has a pixel density of 91.79 and dot pitch .2767. The 49" 4k tv has a pixel density of 89.91 and dot pitch .2825.
Just looking at raw numbers, you'd say it was virtually the same. But the difference in person was just staggering. The monitor was so bad I couldn't stand to look at it any more. I said the hell with dual screen completely and just use the raw real estate of the 4k tv for everything now. The monitor is collecting dust.
The tv is about 3 1/2ft from me. The monitor was 18"-24", somewhere in there at best guess.
If I had a TV your size, I could easily sit back another foot or two and maintain the same results. We aren't sitting 8-10ft+ away from these things like people in a lot of living rooms, and struggling to see the difference. It's immediately and blatantly obvious, and you never go back.