| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Douglas Eagleson" |
| Date: |
07 Aug 2005 08:51:12 PM |
| Object: |
The Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 3 |
The Philosophical Physicist, Statement NO. 3
Douglas Eagleson, 2005
A sentence in analogy is considered
a specific relation used in the
alternative context.
And here the relation of mathematics to
that of geometry is discussed.
A mathematical relation as opposed to
that of geometry is a real distinctly
separate subject.
A geometric relation is always
geometer's angle related.
While the mathematical relation appears
the set.
And the means of analogy between mathematics
and geometry is an exact science.
A set as the memebership of the abstract is
unrelated to the ratio of angles.
And to cause the set to equal the
angle is the proper usage of the
geometric analogy.
A set as the relationship to
cause existence of memebership
appears the resolution of the analogy
of geometry to mathematics.
A relation of the angle causes the
existence, also.
Except the angle itself appears to
relate angle to ratio.
And here the ratio of sides is found
a member as opposed to the cause to exist.
A sentence of profound nature was
the last.
A distance to the distance relation
as opposed to the effect of the distance
appears the dilemma.
A size of triangle side as a cause to
set existence is the dilemma stated
once more in mathematical terms.
A ratio to cause the size as opposed to
the size causing the size.
And here again is the statment to cause
a resolution. An angle as a size is
clearly independent of the ratio of sides.
A concept of unit ratio is introduced
to cause mathematical resolution.
A radian of angle causes the unit
ratio.
And when the triangle appears nonstandard
the ratio of sides appears only the
relation of the triangle.
A clear ratio of any angle to any side
is infinitely variable when not associated
as the triangle.
Yes, the geometer's protractors must
cause the two sided line segment intersection.
And this commonly ignored relation of
the angle to the ratio appears the
dilemma in reality.
An angle is independent of the
side size ratio.
And the set of the angle is then
the exact geometric construction.
Yes, the angle set on the protractor
defines the set.
And to cause the two line segments to intersect
with differing side sizes, requires
two different angle settings.
A triangle as the means of resolution
to the set dilemma is a common
existence.
A segment as the angle's outcome
is the point to point
relation of the compass with sides
assumed unknown.
Yes, the geometer must cause the
equilateral triangle with a compass
with unequal side lengths.
And here an exact understanding of the
capacity of the compass is the mere
line segment without a known length.
An arbitary line length in relation
to the compass setting is assumed in
geometry.
And the discovery of the means of equilateral
triangle generation, by compass, is forever the
resolution of mathematics to geometry.
An intersection of equal circles causes
the triangles to exist.
And the power of the compass to cause the
intersection is its capacity to
cause equal sets.
Making the equilateral triangle
a mathematical set.
Many constructions of geometry
are not commonly equatable to
mathematics.
A line segment of unkown size
is caused to exist without knowledge.
A set without memebrship is the result.
A compass with unknown sides causes this
set existence without set membership.
And here the relation of the equilateral triangle
is seen as the cause to mathematical
set membership.
A three sided membership of equal size,
for the triangle sides,
is distinct from the set of known
sides of equal size.
Yes, triangle existence is independent
of the sides.
And all sides are line segments.
Making the set of segments of a certain
size inclusive of their existence
in the triangle.
A side in geometry is always a
mere line segment.
In common usage the side is held
independent of the line segment by
common convention.
A convention to ensure the resolution
of mathematics to geometry.
And in fact the set of line segments
exists without relation to the angle
itself.
A meaning to intersection is the set
of this relation.
And all triangles are therefor the
intersection of the compass's
arcs.
An arc of geometry must therefor
be caused to equal the set of
mathematics.
And once again the arc of 2pi
gives the impression of the resolution.
In fact the arbitary arc has a certain
chord.
And the ratio of chord appears the
resolution.
Given the arbitary compass arc
and the chord defined, what
mathematical set exists with
set membership?
An area of chord appears.
And this chord area is independent of the
ratio of the compass arms.
.
|
|
| User: "Uncle Al" |
|
| Title: Re: The Philosophical Physicist, Statement No. 3 |
08 Aug 2005 11:52:12 AM |
|
|
Douglas Eagleson wrote:
The Philosophical Physicist, Statement NO. 3
Douglas Eagleson, 2005
[snip crap]
And when the triangle appears nonstandard
the ratio of sides appears only the
relation of the triangle.
[snip rs of crap]
Hey dimbulb fuckwad - get a better text randomizer. Try BABBLE!
--
Uncle Al
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/
(Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals)
http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/qz.pdf
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
