Notices
Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: I MAY WIN A NOBEL FOR THIS... IVE DISPROVED PYTHAGORAS!!!

  1. #1 I MAY WIN A NOBEL FOR THIS... IVE DISPROVED PYTHAGORAS!!! 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    ASIA
    Posts
    9
    In a right angled triangle the square of the hypotenuse is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides.

    I have several ways of proving this theory wrong. Nevertheless, I will just explain one of my objections.

    Imagine that the triangle was ‘pasted to a sphere’s surface. Now the side view would be of a triangle of a 2D hypotenuse, instead of a 1D one. Now obviously, the curved edge would be at an angle to the straight edge of this hypotenuse. Therefore, this “ridge ’’ in the hypotenuse would be at an angle to the original 1D line, and since it is 2D, it would have a height of it’s own.

    So far, Pythagoras might be giggling in Greek at me, in his grave. But now I suddenly unleash my genius at him in full blaze, blinding him, and CRUSHING HIS OWN ABILITY INTO OBLIVION WITH MY OWN….


    For This height would, at least theorotically, ACT AS A COMPNENT TO THE HORIZONTAL LENGTH OF THE ORIGINAL HYPOTENUSE…
    So if the original were calculated according to that old gents’ method, which does not make allowance for this extra length ion such a circumstance, the result WOULD BE WRONG!!!

    Having, as I promised, disproved This great man as though I were a smashing a snail, I will now await my next challenger… WHOM I WILL STUN AND LEAVE CRUSHED IN THE DUST..


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    625
    Imagine that the triangle was ‘pasted to a sphere’s surface.
    This is where deluded grandeur can get you killed.

    Don't you realise that the Pythagoras Theorem is applicable only to Euclidean geometry i.e. a geometry dealing with flat lines? The Pythagoras Theorem works only there. Yet a sphere is a geometry with curved lines i.e. a nonj-Euclidean geometry. Anyone could tell you that you cannot apply Euclidean geometry there.

    As such, you haven't disproved it; merely applied it to another geometry where it is not supposed to be used.


    In control lies inordinate freedom; in freedom lies inordinate control.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    60
    There's more. The atomic theory containes at least one big mistake. I will tell later cauze im little hazy now.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    Quote Originally Posted by Leon23
    There's more. The atomic theory containes at least one big mistake. I will tell later cauze im little hazy now.
    so hazy in fact that you posted in the wrong thread
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    29
    Exactly- the only way to calculate an object such as the one you described would be to cut the sphere and unfold it to form a net. And if, as you said, you simply glued the right triange on, then when unfolded, it would a the esact same triange and you can use Pthagorean Theorum to prove the hypotenuse!
    Fringe Girl
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •