My Math Forum (http://mymathforum.com/math-forums.php)
-   Math (http://mymathforum.com/math/)
-   -   A different view of the triangle (http://mymathforum.com/math/338963-different-view-triangle.html)

 Nanite February 6th, 2017 07:21 AM

A different view of the triangle

So I was doing some primitive math with the triangle and I stumbled on a view that I had never encountered before. I have always known the triangle to be the standard 3x3 configuration (meaning there are 3 sides and 3 points). When I was doing these primitive calculations, I got a 4x2 statement where only 2 points and 2 sides were defined; the 3rd point and side were dynamic/silent. I found this intriguing and have still to do the definition and math behind it. Cheers

 skipjack February 6th, 2017 03:06 PM

How did you manage to define a second side without using a third point?

 complicatemodulus February 6th, 2017 11:15 PM

Sure you don't miss the definition of the Origin ?

 Joppy February 7th, 2017 12:29 AM

Dynamic/silent? Are the sides and points ninjas?

 Nanite February 7th, 2017 08:00 AM

I wasn't planing to do the math behind the 4x2 statement, but I saw 3 interesting replies to my definition of the triangle... so I sat down and worked on it for a bit. I was trying to define and at the same time to work with your questions and I concluded indefinitely that one of the answers is "the definition of the line". If you define the line properly, you will be able to say that in a triangle only one of the points has to be dynamic to make it a dynamic triangle instead of a static one like the statement 3x3 defines.

 Benit13 February 8th, 2017 01:36 AM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Nanite (Post 561674) So I was doing some primitive math with the triangle and I stumbled on a view that I had never encountered before. I have always known the triangle to be the standard 3x3 configuration (meaning there are 3 sides and 3 points). When I was doing these primitive calculations, I got a 4x2 statement where only 2 points and 2 sides were defined; the 3rd point and side were dynamic/silent. I found this intriguing and have still to do the definition and math behind it. Cheers
Why does a "3x3 configuration", in your terminology, mean "3 sides and 3 points" yet "4x2 configuration" means "2 points and 2 sides" rather than "4 points and 2 sides"? You need to explain exactly what you mean by a "configuration".

What do you mean by "primitive calculations"? What do you mean by a "statement"? What do you mean by "dynamic/silent"?

 Nanite February 8th, 2017 02:31 PM

3x3 and 4x2

A configuration in the case of the Triangle consists of 3 point and 3 sides, And that is the universal rule of a Triangle. A 3x3 statement is as follows: ( point),(side), (point), (side), (point), (side). The Array starts with a (point) and ends with a (side) that's the 2 in the statement 4x2, the four is the sum of the remaining sides and points. In the statement (4)x2 the four represents 2 pairs of (points) and (side) which are defined, they have a (point) and a (side). The Elements are further explained unlike the remaining (point) witch starts the array and the (side) that ends the array. These two lonely elements need to be defined just like the two pairs in the middle. In order to define those two undefined elements a point and a side, you have to close the array. You can close the array by examining the 4x2 statement which is as follows: (point)x3 and (sides)x3. Which loops as back to the 3x3 statement but with an explanation, that is far more advanced than just drawing a triangle and saying I made a triangle. Your statement “4 points and 2 sides” is not flawed because it pinpoints the lonely element of the (point) and the other statement that is in close proximity to it is the statement “4 sides 2 points” witch pinpoints the lonely (side) of the array in 3x3 triangle. This concludes that there is a (point) and a (side) in the case of the triangle that can be dynamic(defined) or silent(not defined). Hence giving us the right to define the triangle as we wish when we close the array. Of course it is more complicated because in a 3x3 triangle we are allowed to put any random value and call it any triangle which makes us escape from the math. The math of “the point” and the math of the “line” and so forth. I hope this gives you an insight why there are only 4 elements defined in the statement 4x2 and 2 elements are “floating”. This is part of the “why” when you draw a triangle.

Now I call these “primitive calculations” because they are older than planet Earth. A statement is an element within a rule and part of that rule. Can you guess which is the statement 1x5?

 topsquark February 8th, 2017 03:49 PM

Oh, heck. Why not let things get really interesting and draw the triangles on a Klein bottle? You'd get some really neat stuff like a triangle that intersects itself. :eek:

-Dan

 Nanite February 8th, 2017 04:39 PM

In defence.

I wonder how many times you can intersect a triangle and call it an accomplishment and win a trophy that looks like a Klein bottle? (Btw, I had to google what a Klein bottle is to check whether you are a genius who had something to contribute in my thread.)

 v8archie February 8th, 2017 05:32 PM

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Nanite (Post 561788) I hope this gives you an insight...
Nope. It's clear as mud.

Quote:
 Originally Posted by Nanite (Post 561788) Now I call these “primitive calculations” because they are older than planet Earth.
That sounds like pseudo-mystical balderdash. It's the sort of statement designed to cast doubt on everything else you write and also your sanity.

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:50 PM.