/lit/ - Literature

average 10 year old knows more about triangles than those old dead faggots Lmao

a^2=b^2+c^2-2bccosA desu

>>11195880
ur a real human bean

They probably had "let no one enter who eats beans" on the door as well. Filthy Pythagorean's

>>11195866
Unironically this, desu. Being a sage when human knowledge was literally just a few unconnected scraps here and there was easy as fuck.

>>11195829

This is a well-known tradition. It is also contradicted by a major Platonic/Socratic dialogue.

Suppose for discussion that the tradition is historically factual. Then this contradicts a central philosophical conclusion of the Meno, in which Socrates purports to demonstrate that certain types of knowledge, specifically a simple mathematical demonstration, are /innate/ in human beings, needing only to be re-discovered or re-established through straightforward inquiry. To demonstrate this, Socrates discourses with a slave, who is "ignorant of geometry", and obtains the slave's assent (and more than this, his presumptive /understanding/) of the validity of a method for doubling a square. Socrates then concludes that because the slave was able to easily follow the proof despite never having been trained in geometry, that the proof is an example of knowledge which the slave already really had, but just had to be teased out by the process.

If one assigns this capacity, or potential to all human beings, then in a definite sense, no one is "ignorant of geometry" and consequently the traditional motto of the groves of Academe is void.

>>11195866
>average 10 year old knows more about triangles than Euclid and Archimedes

>>11195930
>going this far to rationalize his ignorance of geometry

Just pick up the Elements my dude...

>>11195955
>learning natural science from a highly abstract 2000 year old book
Sounds like a great decision, using more modern terminology and knowledge is fucking gay

>>11196095
>natural science

?????????????????

>>11195829
(c*e^(ix) + R*e^(-ix) ) * cosh(zx + h) = approximation of gravity waves in the ocean near the margins of sea ice

>>11195829

Just knowing the Pythagorean theorem would’ve gotten you endless sex and attention from all the young boys of value back then anon.

>>11196200
Pythagoras practiced and advocated total celibacy except for procreation and thought sexual losses were extremely harmful.
Someone asked him how frequently one should make love
His reply
>when you want to lose whatever strength you have left.

>>11195829
It was ironic.

>>11196224
sounds like your average online MGTOW fag

>>11196251
>straw man ad hominem
MTGOW faggots are pornography users, and buy sex dolls. They are a population that wants to have sex but can't get it.

I <3 Mary O'Connor!

>>11195866
>>11195889
>>11195955
>>11196095
Postdiluvians don't even understand that he's talking about sacred geometry as the means of ascension.

>>11196224
>pythagoreans got zero boypussy
Losers.

>draws triangle on the floor
>"woah, this guy is good"

>>11196306
>he cute

>>11196302
continue sir

>>11196095
The Elements is nothing that is unlike what is currently being taught. The sad part is that, unlike the Elements, contemporary academics use some kind of miscellaneous hodge-podge of assorted, various material to teach geometry (that most likely commits some form of philosophical error in the system) as opposed to Euclid's elements which is undeniably a masterpiece of logic.

Keep in mind, Euclid's Elements is a battle-tested document. Back in those days every mathematician had an 'Elements' of their own, and would go around to other mathematicians and tear their system down by some kind of logical contradiction. This is why you see Elements persisting for 2000 years as being taught the end-all-be-all geometric document. Simply using other forms of learning like 'Khan Academy' is why contemporary society is a watered-down, stupid shithole. There is literally a perfect way to teach Geometry, technically speaking, and The Elements is it.

Now that being said realize two things:
1) That The Elements is primarily a way to teach you the basis for the four elements (Earth, Air, Fire, and Water, besides Space) delineated in Plato's Timaeus.
2) That there ARE some weaknesses or Achilles' heel's, so-to-speak, in Euclid's Elements. This is the fifth postulate. There are many others, of course, but noticing something wrong with the fifth postulate started as soon as the document was published. You see Proclus being critical of it in his Commentary on the First Book.

So anyway, you simply stating trigonometry does not make you smarter simply because the concepts of tangent or cotangent weren't rationalized in that day and age, Ptolemy's Table of Chords (I. 11 of Almagest) is essentially Trigonometry, for example. You overestimate the amount of mathematical progress that has occurred. I could even make the argument that calculus was founded in the B.C. era in Archimedes/Eratosthenes time and that since then every single contribution by a mathematician has been a superficial and/or trivial one.

>>11195955
Tbh, everyone should read The Elements. There is something psychologically beneficial about thinking about the world in the way that the ancient mathematicians do. Admittedly, since Pappus' time, mathematics benefited severely. So much so, that it is almost a loss that mathematics currently does not use the Analytical-Synthetical method anymore, because Pappus' extant work, the Arabic translation of Arithmetica, and almost the whole Islamic golden age of mathematics is more logically well thought-out than the ancient mathematicians. But in terms of learning how to construct proofs, my suggestion is just read Euclid's Elements, then if you are still interested in geometry go ahead and read the way it's taught today. You'll thank me later for Elements though, it will help your logical foundations.

>>11195930
he meant that all humans through dialectic could remember the knowledge of the Forms from prior to their incarnation not that humans right now actually had the knowledge, but that it had to be recollected. you didn't read the Meno or Phaedo carefully you massive pseud
>>11196095
it teaches you the logic of geometric thought in rather simplistic terms, there are actually better books for this from modern mathematicians (written for kids at private schools; where their parents actually care about their sapience), but its not at all a poor introduction to mathematical thinking.
>>11196224
Pythagoras isn't a real person, there is absolutely no historical record of him beyond much later persons mentioning him. We have fucking coins from the Seleucid era of Alexander, we don't have so much as a mention in a ship manifest, speech, trial record or any kind of journal entry mentioning a Pythagoras circa 6th C BCE

>>11195829
fucking faggot didn't even know what an integral was and wants to talk to me about geometry

>>11196337

On the contrary, you didn't read my post carefully. If you had done so, you would understand that the thrust of what I wrote (admittedly informally and quickly) is yet in agreement with the final clauses of your first sentence here. Apart from this, your claim that Pythagoras didn't exist is a very hot take and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

>>11196425
It’s so annoying when people don’t realize that just because your logic doesn’t add up or it seems like you didn’t think things through, or you made mistakes doesnt mean you didnt intend the contradictions. Sometimes this is the case but im really not being ironic, Im not, im seriously not but the more i deny it the more it seems that i am, even though im really *not*. I have this problem all the time.

>>11196490

All that's really going on here, assuming that you are >>11196337 and attempting mockery, is that you're again demonstrating your poor reading comprehension. You're dug in now and so forced to argue the point where you don't even actually have one. Be a lamb and give us the link for the hot takes newsletter.

>>11196321
I don't really know enough about it off-hand, but since Plato specifically describes geometry as the building blocks of the universe and ancient knowledge of Egyptians and antediluvians in Timaeus it struck me as likely this is the geometry he was referring to. The Egyptians were obsessed with sacred geometry and the older structures in Egypt are built with specific mathematical and geometrical specifications in mind that doesn't make sense from a strictly utilitarian standpoint. This kind of geometry has been used in monolithic architecture all over the world and it's believed they hold the key to some spiritual, religious or energy related knowledge that's been lost to time.

Specific acoustics and sound frequencies (which are a result of building with this geometry in mind) in relation to the human body played a big part in the construction of places of worship in some Greek mysteries.

https://phys.org/wire-news/164386603/ancient-man-used-super-acoustics-to-alter-consciousness-and-spe.html

This is more /x/ territory and a lot of the /(lefty)pol/ materialists here will discard it as pseudoscience. Maybe it is, but I definitely believe there is a hidden truth and purpose in the geometry of these ancient structures that have been lost in time and that people like Plato were initiated in its secrets. The subject is filled with new age charlatans and wild conjectures, but it's interesting nonetheless.

>>11195955
https://www.euclidea.xyz/
You might want to pick up a compass and straightedge instead.