Southperry.net
I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Printable Version

+- Southperry.net (https://www.southperry.net)
+-- Forum: Social (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Shenanigans (https://www.southperry.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=51)
+--- Thread: I found a triangle with two right angles! =D (/showthread.php?tid=7173)

Pages: 1 2


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Stereo Wrote:look, a triangle with 3 90 degree angles.

 Holy pomegranate

That's... Quite fantastic, really.


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Kawasari Mimoto - 2009-01-08

Lolwut


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - DrRusty - 2009-01-08

Holypie Wrote:i think the TS's wierdo triangle is because it's so damn huge that it LOOKED like 90 degrees

actually it would probably look more like a straight line from far away.


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Nikkey - 2009-01-08

Stereo Wrote:look, a triangle with 3 90 degree angles.

 Holy pomegranate

Triangles must have 3 straight lines in all 3 (or more?) dimensions in order to be called a triangle Redface


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Devil's Sunrise Wrote:Triangles must have 3 straight lines in all 3 (or more?) dimensions in order to be called a triangle Redface

Technically, if you set the XY plane to be the sphere, it'd work... However, that's VERY advanced math, getting close to making my head explode D:


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Dusk - 2009-01-08

Alloy Wrote:Technically, if you set the XY plane to be the sphere, it'd work... However, that's VERY advanced math, getting close to making my head explode D:

It's just spherical coordinates. Usually taught in the 3rd semester of Calculus.


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Hazzy - 2009-01-08

:[
89.9999999999999 =/= 90
Quantact Wrote:Where are the boobs? Eek

Look at the red circles more closely.

Devil's Sunrise Wrote:Triangles must have 3 straight lines in all 3 (or more?) dimensions in order to be called a triangle Redface

Triangles are 2D. :[


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Dusk Wrote:It's just spherical coordinates. Usually taught in the 3rd semester of Calculus.

Didn't get to learn that here... But thinking it again, It must be like the earth's coordinate points... Must be still a pain in the ass to do equations and stuff with them, though...


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - chrome - 2009-01-08

Hazzy Wrote::[
89.9999999999999 =/= 90
Actually...

0.999... = 1, :. 89.999... = 90


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Nikkey - 2009-01-08

Ben Wrote:Actually...

0.999... = 1, :. 89.999... = 90

no, certainly not. 1/3 equals 0.333..., but that's just a floating point value and a loss of precision.

Hazzy Wrote:Triangles are 2D. :[

They would still be 2D in 3D as long their lines are straight.


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Ben Wrote:Actually...

0.999... = 1, :. 89.999... = 90


Alloy Wrote:10x - x = 9.9999999... - 0.9999999...

THAT is the wrong part. There's a small thing in maths called... infinitesimals.
The MOST small number, consisting in an infinitely small number, thus indefined.

Basically, 0.9999999... is 1 minus an infinitesimal. After multiplying by ten, it goes to...

10(-10 infinitesimals) - 1(+1 infinitesimal)

And taking those out, you get...

9(-9 infinitesimals)

ACTUALLY, by proximity, you get it closer to 8.99999999..., instead of 9.

Alloy Wrote:ok...

An infinitesimal can be defined as:

0.000000...

BUT imagine it has a 1 in the end (after infinity zeros), to put it simple. That'd be the smallest number EVER. So small that can't be defined.

0.999999... Would be 1 minus that number, as you can figure out. If you follow the calculus at the first post, it uses an aproximation when multiplying by ten, and takes off those 9 extra infinitesimals, when it shouldn't.

In my post, you see what happens with them, after adding them in. Granted, the result is practically the same, but not exactly.

There, taken from an obscure thread lost in time long ago... D:


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - chrome - 2009-01-08

Devil's Sunrise Wrote:no, certainly not. 1/3 equals 0.333..., but that's just a floating point value and a loss of precision.

x = 0.999...
10x = 10(0.999...)
10x = 9.999...
10x - x = 9.999... - 0.999...
9x = 9
x = 1

0.333... = 1/3
(0.333... = 1/3)3
0.999... = 1

Proofs I just digged up, found out one of them was lol


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Ben Wrote:(0.333... = 1/3)3

Ah! But you can't accurately multiply a number that "never ends". If anything, you should transform it into a fraction to calculate it, first. And oh, hey, it turns out to be 1! (Example, try to multiply the square root of 2 accurately... Can only use "x ยท √2")

Unless you DO multiply all the 3s in there. If you accomplish that feat, I'll give you a medal Big Grin


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Dusk - 2009-01-08

No, that proof is correct. The problem is that Hazzy said 89.9999999999999, not 89.9999....


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - z0mgc00k13 - 2009-01-08

Stereo Wrote:look, a triangle with 3 90 degree angles.

 Holy pomegranate

yay for non-linear Big Grin

yay for XYZ


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Hazzy - 2009-01-08

Ben Wrote:Actually...

0.999... = 1, :. 89.999... = 90

89.999... = 90
89.999 =/= 90

Rolleyes


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Alloy - 2009-01-08

Dusk Wrote:No, that proof is correct. The problem is that Hazzy said 89.9999999999999, not 89.9999....

I see... I've done a bit of extra research, and while it's true, it's, however, a limit... It equals to 1, but isn't 1 "exactly".


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - ShadowMarck - 2009-01-08

Huh... Wait, what?

Uh-oh... (inside mind: I'MMA FIRIN MAH LAZOOOOOOR! BWAAAAAAAARGH!!!!!!!!!) (head lazored itself really bad)


I found a triangle with two right angles! =D - Dusk - 2009-01-08

Alloy Wrote:I see... I've done a bit of extra research, and while it's true, it's, however, a limit... It equals to 1, but isn't 1 "exactly".

Limits can be evaluated. That's the point of a limit, to allow us to describe a value that will never be reached but becomes infinitesimally close.

It is exactly 1 and can replace 1 in any situation. Yes, it defies logic, but it's true.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci-math-faq/specialnumbers/0.999eq1/