Thread: Possible Alternative to Trigonometry

I did hear you but I wasn't talking to you, I was addressing the question posed by the original poster.

It's nice to see that you posted your little theorem; for the purposes of checking it, could I ask if you are referring to the bisector of the opposite sides, or the bisector of the angle?

You should know that all of this stuff although pretty is rather antiquated; it's easy to discover and to prove (or disprove) such theorems nowadays using more modern vector methods, and there's not really much use for them.

You have got to be joking.

No, sorry.

I... don't think accountants are in the habit of using geometry.

I really can't make head or tail of whatever argument you're making. I guess you misunderstood me, because I wasn't talking about non-Euclidean geometry or anything. The old news I was referring to was Euclidean Geometry. As I say, it's just rather antiquated. It was extremely important for the modern world historically because it reintroduced (in the Renaissance) the concept of rationality and infallible logical proof as authority rather than dogma, but in itself, it was more of a Greek preoccupation than anything. It is very beautiful and pure, and it is still studied for these reasons, but it is simply not necessary nowadays, as we have developed a hell of a lot more mathematics for dealing with Euclidean space, which simply makes the Euclidean methods redundant as it all falls out very simply of our more useful modern methods.

Of course Euclid's works were not wrong, they will remain true for time immemorial; it is just that we don't really have any practical interest in them nowadays. We learn a few essential, basic theorems in school, and then everything else follows.

I asked an extremely clear question in my previous post by the way, about a previous remark you made which was not sufficiently defined, and I'd appreciate it if you'd answer;

Originally Posted by Xei

could I ask if you are referring to the bisector of the opposite sides, or the bisector of the angle?

These are two different things and so you need to clarify.

Theoretical Disaster pt. 2?

Originally Posted by malac

Theoretical Disaster pt. 2?

Ha, whilst that would be fun, I don't think I have the energy for it. If he keeps ignoring basic questions then I'll just let it lie again. Hopefully I've satisfied ShockWave.