Does working your angles leave you congruent?
1 posted on
09/22/2009 4:06:41 AM PDT by
decimon
To: decimon
2 posted on
09/22/2009 4:08:58 AM PDT by
Yo-Yo
(Joe Wilson speaks for me.)
To: decimon
They should just contact the CBO - they are quite adept at solving computational problems with very large numbers.
To: The_Reader_David; ThePythonicCow; snarks_when_bored; Wonder Warthog; Robert A. Cook, PE; ...
Like, *PING*, dudes.
Cheers!
6 posted on
09/22/2009 4:18:40 AM PDT by
grey_whiskers
(The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
To: decimon
I was right. All that math I learned in school and I’ve used none of it beyond balancing the checkbook.
8 posted on
09/22/2009 4:28:05 AM PDT by
bgill
(The framers of the US Constitution established an entire federal government in 18 pages.)
To: decimon
Hold on a secant, we’re going off on a tangent here.
9 posted on
09/22/2009 4:38:15 AM PDT by
agere_contra
(The Democrats use Black people as human shields.)
To: decimon
Only tangentially interesting.
10 posted on
09/22/2009 4:41:17 AM PDT by
UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide
(Give Them Liberty Or Give Them Death! - IT'S ISLAM, STUPID! - Islam Delenda Est! - Rumble thee forth)
To: All
Bad puns growing exponentially...never a good sine.
15 posted on
09/22/2009 6:01:29 AM PDT by
JRios1968
(The real first rule of Fight Club: don't invite Chuck Norris...EVER)
To: decimon
18 posted on
09/22/2009 4:55:05 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
(https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
To: decimon
I thought congruent is what they fed Oliver in the orphanage.
19 posted on
09/22/2009 5:11:18 PM PDT by
colorado tanker
(Barack Obama is an old Kenyan word for Jimmy Carter)
To: decimon
In 1225, Fibonacci (of "Fibonacci numbers" fame) showed that 5 and 7 were congruent numbers, and he stated, but did not prove, that 1 is not a congruent number. That proof was supplied by Fermat (of "Fermat's last theorem" fame) in 1659.Found this pdf which gives Fermat's proof. It actually proves that no perfect square can be congruent, and uses Fermat's famous "method of infinite descent". That is, it proves that given any congruent perfect square, a smaller one can be derived, so there can be no smallest congruent perfect square, and this is a contradiction.
Anyway, I never heard of congruent numbers before, so thanks for the link. I came across a bunch of other number theory news in the process of ( minimally ) educating myself. These guys are busy, busy, busy!
21 posted on
09/22/2009 7:30:48 PM PDT by
dr_lew
To: decimon
There’s gonna be an xkcd toon on this one and about 20 people in the country will understand it...
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
