Talk:Triangle
|
I wonder if there's another formula to add for the area of the triangle, based upon dot products of vectors. When you take the vector from point 1 to point 3 as U, and the vector from point 3 to point 2 as V: A = 0.5 * sqrt ((U*U)(V*V)-(U*V)(U*V)). I just derived that based upon the geometric version A=0.5(base)(height), calculating the point of intersection of the altitude along the base, to be V*U/U*U. If this appears right to others, then someone might add it.
Could someone redraw the scalene triangle, It isn't scalene. Ooops - yes it is. It isn't acute, but then it doesn't say it is trying to be - sorry.
Am I the only one who thinks that the geometrical triangle is entitled to reside at triangle? It's far and away the most common usage of the word, and links in the future are naturally going to be made to triangle instead of triangle (geometry). Triangle should have a simple disambig block at the top for the few other meanings. "Triangle" isn't like Orange, which has many possible meanings; it's more like Pentagon, which has a primary meaning and a few derivatives. --Minesweeper 10:03, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)
- I totally agree. I'll have to hear a very good opinion on the current setup in the next few days, or else I'll revert. — Sverdrup (talk) 14:04, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'd always been taught to use the term right angled triangles - is the usage right triangle a different regional variant? Is mine the regional variant (UK/Ireland)? What does the wider community say? --Paul
- In the United States, "right triangle" is the only term I've heard. I don't think I've heard "right angled triangle" before.63.190.97.177 07:51, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Contents [hide] |
Congratulations
Oh, dear! The diagrams in this page are GOOD! Whoever did them did a good job! Pfortuny 21:49, 31 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I second that. Fantastic page with wonderful diagrams. I learned more than I ever expected (or wanted to) about triangles. - Plutor 14:46, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
I've found the article generally clear, but I have some criticisms. The first one is about the use of term "equal" (instead of "congruent) and the confusion of angles with their amplitudes. For instance:
In Euclidean geometry, the sum of the angles α + β + γ is equal to two right angles (180° or π radians). This allows determination of the third angle of any triangle as soon as two angles are known.
should IMHO be:
In Euclidean geometry, the sum of the internal angles is a straight angle. This allows determining the amplitude of the third internal angle of any triangle once the amplitudes of the others are known.
Similar confusions exist between segments and their lengths.
Am I wrong? Don´t think so. Is it possible for a triangle to have three acute angles?
- It's quite possible. An equilateral triangle has three 60° angles. 60 < 90, so they're all acute. - Plutor 16:14, 17 May 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks, Plutor, my brain went out for lunch.
I'd like to know where the shape called trochoid fits into the grand scheme of triangles. It's been a while since I've touched geometry, so please forgive me. I don't know if it's the proper term, but it is used to describe the shape of the rotor in the Wankel engine found in the Mazda RX-7/8 and others vehicles. I'd have to say it's a 2D shape with a 1D surface, and basically an equalateral triangle with curved, instead of straight, sides. TimothyPilgrim 13:10, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)
Questions
Would someone please tell readers what program was used to draw the diagrams and write the equations, they are very well done.
Excellent work... however
The information on this article is a bit disjointed. Where are the references? - Ta bu shi da yu 13:12, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sum of the angles of TRIangle
Sum of the angles is EXACT 3, nothing less and/or nothing more. Someones use 180 or 200 for the value of the sum but three (3) is not divisible (or multiple) by 2 if one wants to be exact. -Santa Claus