posted on Jan, 23 2013 @ 11:11 PM
reply to post by SplitInfinity
Geometry is paramount to the situation and beyond what the math will tell you by itself. Without a rigid geometry to guide the way of your math, there
are too many possibilities and strange things to account for. We make a great deal many assumptions, but with geometry everything is visible.
I ask you to consider this:
Square numbers can be represented using equilateral triangular geometries. If you were to Google say, "Pythagorean's Theorem" what would you expect
to find in the image category. How many images would you need to go through before you came across one that even remotely looks like the version of
the theorem I present to you below?
You would find countless images that show a (3,4,5) 90 degree triangle right? On each side of that triangle you would find a 3x3, a 4x4, and a 5x5
square geometry mapped to each corresponding side.
Now I present to you the following.
Pythagorean's Theorem Explained
Now, once you realize that both geometries appear to be correct, you start to wonder. Why does it matter which geometry you use in this case? Both
appear to equate to the equation?
The reason is because of the interior angles. Counting 4 times 90 degrees in the case of a square gives you 360. Counting 3 times 60 degrees gives you
180. This error has trickled down in ways I can't even begin to describe.
Thank you for your time, and welcome to Tetryonic Theory. I am merely a new student of Tetryonics and after giving it an honest look, it appears to
present something more refined and elaborate than anything else.
I would be honored if you would kindly offer your opinions on this matter.