This is easy to stumble over because the construction without a negative, such a thing, is anomalous.
Any word you might substitute for such—a word which plays the same syntactic role, such as similar or like or different or other—follows the article: a similar thing, a like thing, a different thing, another thing. And historically, in fact, a such thing alternated freely with such a thing before the language decided it preferred the such a construction about 1400.
Once you realize that the underlying sense is a such, the proper negative becomes clear: no replaces a as the determiner, and reverts to its normal position: no similar thing, no like thing, no different thing, no other thing—and no such thing.
But your instinct is shared by many native speakers. The construction such a thing is so firmly fixed on people's tongues that you will frequently hear people say no such a thing. And at least in my own native dialect the struggle to make syntactic sense of the construction results in no such of a thing.
When you want to express that one thing leads to another, you use the ..., the ... with two comparatives. The comparative here is more, so you use
The more money people have, the more they want.
If you use the followed by a superlative, it indicates the maximum that can be reached, as in
The best they could hope for, was to save their lives.
Much in your example is the indicative, and "the much" is ungrammatical, so no, you cannot use that (as far as I know) in any correct way.
"As much more" is ungrammatical, you are confusing then "as + indicative" as in:
As much money as they have, they always want more.
With the the, the construction that you are trying to form.
"Much more" is a strange construction in itself; you use "much" to indicate that we are not talking about simply more of something, but more than that: it is "a lot more".
This simply does not work in the construction with the/the.
Best Answer
In the second sentence I would have written something like, "My worth is twice as much as his."