3 ms·
Yeah, they made a symmetry argument, a series expansion argument, and a law of sines argument. None of those require the Pythagorean Theorem and are all separat
by kurthr 4y ago
Yeah, they made a symmetry argument, a series expansion argument, and a law of sines argument. None of those require the Pythagorean Theorem and are all separately proven. There may be a reason that it's wrong (I'm not a mathematician but the article's author is).
So, they showed why the sum of squares is true for the hypotenuse of a triangle. It's even an exact proof rather than a limit argument. That I could follow the steps, and other mathematicians seem unaware of this combination of tools makes it seem relatively novel.
- oceansea 4y ago[flagged]
- klyrs 4y agoSpeaking as a mathematician with a PhD, you're wrong about proofs. You're wrong about this site, which intends to promote a curious and celebratory attitude towards knowledge. Ironically, it is you who is displaying the hateful attitude that you bemoan. Please adjust your attitude, or see yourself out. And do re-read the article; the author is attempting to reconstruct their proof without seeing it. You're attacking the students without even seeing their work. Incomprehensible.
- dang 4y agoPlease don't respond to a bad comment by breaking the site guidelines yourself. That only makes things worse. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: just for clarity, your comment would be fine without the 3rd and 4th sentences and the final bit.