My Math Forum > Math A new way to Pythagorean Theorem numbers

 Math General Math Forum - For general math related discussion and news

 December 21st, 2016, 05:44 AM #1 Member   Joined: Jul 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 0 A new way to Pythagorean Theorem numbers Choos A > 1 Find B by the formula B = 0.5( AA - 1 ) Find C by the formula C = B + 1 the result .... AA + BB = CC Examples A1.4 B0.48 C1.48 = (A140 B48 C148) = ( A35 B12 C37 ) A1.8 B1.12 C2.12 = (A180 B112 C212 )=( A45 B28 C53 ) A2 B1.5 C2.5 = (A20 B15 C25 ) = ( A4 B3 C5 ) A2.3 B2.145 3.145 = (A2300 B2145 3145)=(A460 B429 C629) A3 B4 C5 A4 B7.5 C8.5 = (A40 B75 C85)=(A8 B15 C17 ) A5 B12 C13 A6 B17.5 C18.5 = (A60 B175 C185 )=(A12 B35 C37) A27 B364 C365 A33 B544 C545 A34 B577.5 C578.5 = (A340 B5775 C5785)=(A68 B1155 C1157) A31 B480 C481 A73 B2664 C2665 Aetzbar Last edited by skipjack; December 21st, 2016 at 05:39 PM.
 December 21st, 2016, 08:26 AM #2 Math Team   Joined: Jan 2015 From: Alabama Posts: 2,243 Thanks: 559 Yes, that's true but hardly new- it is basic algebra. With $\displaystyle B= (1/2)(A^2- 1)= A^2/2- 1/2$ and $\displaystyle C= B+ 1= A^2/2+ 1/2$ Then $\displaystyle A^2+ B^2= A^2+ A^4/4- A^2/2+ 1/4= A^4/4+ A^2/2+ 1/4$ and $\displaystyle C^2= A^4/4+ AY^2/2+ 1/4$. It is the adding 1 that converts the "-1/2" to "1/2". in general (a- b)^2= a^2- 2ab+ b^2. Adding 4ab to that gives a^2+ 2ab+ b^2= (a+ b)^2.
 December 21st, 2016, 10:57 AM #3 Member   Joined: Jul 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 0 Certainly this is basic algebra,so the method is correct. This method does not appear on wikipedia,so it is new.
 December 21st, 2016, 11:46 AM #4 Math Team   Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 6,390 Thanks: 2100 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra You do know that Wikipedia is not a repository of all human knowledge? It's not even reliably accurate.
 December 21st, 2016, 03:36 PM #5 Member   Joined: Jul 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 0 i agree with you wikipedia also does not know, that pi is not fixed. New Geometry of Circles, Which has a unique Pi to each Diameter. The new geometry, has a new Formula Pi of D = 3.1416 + root of ( 0.0000003 : D ) D is the Diameter of a circle, above 0.001 mm The new formula produces the following numbers of pi D of Circle (mm) Unique Pi ------------------------ 3.164 (pi maximum) 0 0.001-------------------- 3.1589205 0.01---------------------- 3.1470772 0.1----------------------- 3.1433321 1------------------------ 3.1421477 10 ---------------------- 3.1417732 100 --------------------- 3.1416548 1000--------------------- 3.1416173 1000000----------------- 3.1416005 10000000---------------- 3.1416002 1000000000000… 3.1416 (pi minimum) The Pi revolution According to the conventional mathematics, Pi of each D = 3.1416 There for, it is very important number. According to the new geometry of circles, There are two important numbers. Pi minimum = 3.1416 Pi maximum = 3.164 Between pi minimum to pi maximum, there is a unique pi to each D Pi of D = 3.1416 + root of ( 0.0000003 : D ) Aetzbar
 December 21st, 2016, 05:11 PM #6 Math Team   Joined: Oct 2011 From: Ottawa Ontario, Canada Posts: 8,136 Thanks: 552 Diameter of Earth: 12742 km pi*d = 40030 3.164*d = 40316 40316 - 40030 = 286 So this "new geometry" makes it longer to travel around Mother Earth?
 December 21st, 2016, 06:33 PM #7 Member   Joined: Jul 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 0 pi of Earth is very close to pi minimum (3.1416)
 December 22nd, 2016, 07:54 AM #8 Member   Joined: Jul 2010 Posts: 66 Thanks: 0 The new way to Pythagorean Theorem numbers, produces Irrational Square. choose A = 1 + root of 2 (side of irrational square ) B = 0.5( AA - 1 ) = 1 + root of 2 ( side of irrational square ) C = B + 1 = 2 + root of 2 ( diagonal of irrational square ) Aetzbar
 December 22nd, 2016, 09:29 AM #9 Math Team   Joined: Oct 2011 From: Ottawa Ontario, Canada Posts: 8,136 Thanks: 552 Dunno; seems to me you're the only one who understands your "irrational language"....
 December 22nd, 2016, 09:42 AM #10 Math Team   Joined: Dec 2013 From: Colombia Posts: 6,390 Thanks: 2100 Math Focus: Mainly analysis and algebra Don't take this question as in any way representing acceptance of your preposterous notion. But, what happens for circles of radius larger than your arbitrary 1000000000000? If I measure a circle as being 1km in diameter, it's circumference is then 3.1421477 km (you claim). And if I measure a circle as being 1,000,000 mm in diameter, it's circumference is then 3,141,600.5 mm (you claim). But these circles are the same circle. And you claim it has two radii that differ by 547.2 m depending only on what units I use to quote my measurement of the diameter. In fact, I could have many different results by using different units. So your conclusion is that we can never know the actual circumference of a circle. It's a new brand of Uncertainty Principal. Even worse, I could find a polygon with a circumference between the maximum and minimum circumferences of a circle, and we'd never no whether the circle was inscribed or circumscribed or both. Last edited by v8archie; December 22nd, 2016 at 09:55 AM.

 Tags numbers, pythagorean, theorem

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 Similar Threads Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post sidra76 Geometry 10 March 9th, 2016 08:23 PM TAVA Geometry 7 August 26th, 2015 09:39 AM Perlita Geometry 1 May 19th, 2014 08:46 AM johnny Geometry 10 September 20th, 2010 04:32 PM moonrains Geometry 2 January 7th, 2009 04:46 PM

 Contact - Home - Forums - Top