
Re: quantum spin 1/2 explained as circumnavigation of a triangle instead of the enclosed square; why we need 120 system not 360
Posted:
Jul 22, 2013 2:07 PM


On Monday, July 22, 2013 5:58:33 AM UTC5, jonas.t...@gmail.com wrote: (snipped) > > > I think you have to learn your AI recognize the difference between the sum of internal and external angles of a polygon. > > > > The external angles always add up to 360 degrees or 1 revolution for any polygon. > > > > The internal angles use the formula in revolutions > > n/21 > > or in degrees > > 360(n/21) > > > > and each inner angle in revolutions > > (n/21)/n > > or in degrees > > 360(n/21)/n
Get out of math. You are not cut out for it. You are a philosopher, where opinion waxs the day. In science, evidence waxs the days.
You asked me why I wrote 135 degrees rather than 0.375 revolutions.
I told you why, because your birdbrain fruitcake suggestion cannot distinguish between 0.375 internal revolution or between 0.375 external revolution.
If math education were left up to you, a teenager would have to say "teacher, it is 0.375 internal revolution" whereas the teenager of today simply says "135 degrees.
So get on over there to alt.philosophy for your lack of math abilities and science understanding is a waste of time here in sci.math.
AP

