Also, all numbers are rational, otherwise they do not make sense
what about the number whose square is -1
Roses are red, Euhler’s a hero, e^iπ+1=0
You’re just imagining it
deleted by creator
as far as the rationals are concerned, this is the same as the number whose square is 2. (ℚ(i) and ℚ(√2) are isomorphic as fields.)
what we can gleam from this is that complete rationality can blur the line between what’s real and what’s imaginary
But Pythagoras hated triangles with irrational hypotenuses. A triangle with leg lengths of 3 and 4 units? Beautiful. A triangle with two 1 unit legs? Die
And not a right triangle in sight. I forget, did Pythagoras develop Pythagorean theorem or the law of sines?
Bottom right, the 3x3, 4x4 and 5x5 checker boards forms Pythagorean Triple Triangle.
Oh yeah! I see, you’re right.
When it came to taking credit … he had all the angles covered
Well, he popularized it, but the Pythagoran theorem was something ancient civilizations had already figured out.
“Every tryangle…”, says man holding a prisma
That’s not a prism, it’s a tetrahedron, the most triangular of the solids!
