I would further like to note that an isoceles right triangle cannot have sides all of whose lengths are a whole number of units, and that whoever edited that manuscript should have noticed that 20:20:24 isn't even close to the right value of the hypotenuse. Since the point of the example is naming shapes of triangles, not the Pythagorean theorem, and they haven't had irrationals or the Pythagorean theorem yet, it got a suggested change to 28 (the closest integer to the actual value), and a note that we can't avoid irrationals, with the shorthand explanation "(1:1:√2)". I haven't handed it in yet, and am now wondering whether it would be better not to give a length for the hypotenuse. The editor on this project may know their pedagogy, but they're not sufficiently intimate with numbers.
Tags:
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
(will be screened if not validated)
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

If you are unable to use this captcha for any reason, please contact us by email at support@dreamwidth.org

.

About Me

redbird: closeup of me drinking tea, in a friend's kitchen (Default)
Redbird

Most-used tags

Powered by Dreamwidth Studios

Style credit

Expand cut tags

No cut tags