I was thinking too far ahead... 3 sides, yes... side as a straight line? nopeArising_uk wrote:Eh!? Even in a non-euclidean space I'd have thought a triangle had only three sides?Impenitent wrote:only in Euclidean space...
-Imp
-Imp
I was thinking too far ahead... 3 sides, yes... side as a straight line? nopeArising_uk wrote:Eh!? Even in a non-euclidean space I'd have thought a triangle had only three sides?Impenitent wrote:only in Euclidean space...
-Imp
But they are straight lines if you define such a thing as the shortest distance between two lines on a plane, that the plane is curved is why the definition of all triangles does not now include that the interior angles must add up to 180 degrees. At least I think so but stand to be corrected as maths and geometry are far from being my strong point.Impenitent wrote:I was thinking too far ahead... 3 sides, yes... side as a straight line? nope
-Imp
... until she finds out that when you said that you were going off to "work", you meant off "to work hustling chicks".Obvious Leo wrote:although my wife and I have got along just fine for nearly forty years without bothering with such trivia.
but we don't exist on a plane... we exist on a sphere in at least 3 dimensions (4 if you have the time)Arising_uk wrote:But they are straight lines if you define such a thing as the shortest distance between two lines on a plane, that the plane is curved is why the definition of all triangles does not now include that the interior angles must add up to 180 degrees. At least I think so but stand to be corrected as maths and geometry are far from being my strong point.Impenitent wrote:I was thinking too far ahead... 3 sides, yes... side as a straight line? nope
-Imp
Your triangle is effectively upon a curved plane.Impenitent wrote: but we don't exist on a plane... we exist on a sphere in at least 3 dimensions (4 if you have the time)
-Imp
the shortest distance between the north pole and the equator is not the arc formed by traversing the surface of the earth...Arising_uk wrote:Your triangle is effectively upon a curved plane.Impenitent wrote: but we don't exist on a plane... we exist on a sphere in at least 3 dimensions (4 if you have the time)
-Imp
Which is why the definition is about curved planes.Impenitent wrote:
the shortest distance between the north pole and the equator is not the arc formed by traversing the surface of the earth...
-Imp
triangles as defined are Euclidian...Arising_uk wrote:Which is why the definition is about curved planes.Impenitent wrote:
the shortest distance between the north pole and the equator is not the arc formed by traversing the surface of the earth...
-Imp
Not since we invented/discovered curved planes they're not.Impenitent wrote: triangles as defined are Euclidian...
-Imp
5-2 = 2??Walker wrote:It has a specific probability but practically speaking in English, although when you take one from two you will have one, when you take two from five you will have two. You can even say that when you take one from nothing you will have nothing.
You know, there are only five different kinds of people in this world; those that can count and those that can't. I guess he must be the forth kind....
5-2 = 2??
New Math?
Si. Go forth to the produce market. Only five apples remain in the apple bin. Take two from the five and you will have two. Had you not partied late last night you would have been the early bird greeted with a larger selection in the bin, and perhaps a worm or two instead of a dollar short.Walker wrote:It has a specific probability but practically speaking in English, although when you take one from two you will have one, when you take two from five you will have two. You can even say that when you take one from nothing you will have nothing.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests