11–20 of 287 posts
The actual title is "Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem" but I don't know why HN automatically converted it to this title.
New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem
is both shorter and less editorial than
Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Excellent points, I am not sure why you were flagged as dead.
Because they are wrong? Read the article. > to make a proof of it would be to show why a^2 + b^2 = c^2 That's what the article shows as a final step. And it outlines what assumptions are made and how the final step is demonstrated. I have no idea what OP is rambling about.
So, they showed why the sum of squares is true for the hypotenuse of a triangle. It's even an exact proof rather than a limit argument. That I could follow the steps, and other mathematicians seem unaware of this combination of tools makes it seem relatively novel.
The actual title is "Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem" but I don't know why HN automatically converted it to this title.
The actual title is "Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem" but I don't know why HN automatically converted it to this title.
[flagged]
> By all accounts, these two teenage math students are the exact opposite of the majority of the math establishment. They are female, they are African-American, and they come from an area which is not particularly renowned for producing high academic achievers. This is just an awesome turn of events and one which should inspire anyone — no matter what their ethnic, gender or socio-demographic background — that excell…
The actual title is "Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem" but I don't know why HN automatically converted it to this title.
"Here's How" is usually used for clickbait stuff and adds nothing of substance to the title itself. New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem is both shorter and less editorial than Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem
An article with zero details about the proof could easily be titled "New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem" but couldn't accurately be titled "Here’s How Two New Orleans Teenagers Found a New Proof of the Pythagorean Theorem." Whereas here it says it'll have more details and it does. (although TBH this is less a "here's how they found" and more a "here's what they found", if I'm being extra pendantic).
The shorter title is less descriptive in this case.
I'm still confused what axioms they're effectively using relative to the usual Pythagorean theorem proofs - most of these use the formula for area of a right triangle and this seemingly doesn't. On the other hand, it seems an infinite construct would require things like the axiom of induction, which may or may not be included in axiom of axiomatic geometry.