3 ms·
I can't follow your reasoning at at. "Drop the height h" is completely ambiguous. And the nice thing about Garfield's proof is that all it requires that you kn
by da_chicken 11mo ago
I can't follow your reasoning at at. "Drop the height h" is completely ambiguous.
And the nice thing about Garfield's proof is that all it requires that you know is the area of a right triangle and the basic Euclidean premises. You can easily get the area of a trapezoid from that.
- dataflow 11mo ago> I can't follow your reasoning at at. "Drop the height h" is completely ambiguous. I'm referring to the classic proof where you drop the height perpendicularly to the hypotenuse from the opposite corner.