Date: Oct 6, 2017 1:39 AM
Author: zelos.malum@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Unreal fiction numbers implies unreal fiction angles too

Den torsdag 5 oktober 2017 kl. 15:44:19 UTC+2 skrev FromTheRafters:
> It happens that Zelos Malum formulated :
> > Den torsdag 5 oktober 2017 kl. 14:29:02 UTC+2 skrev FromTheRafters:
> >> Zelos Malum used his keyboard to write :
> >>> Den torsdag 5 oktober 2017 kl. 11:46:45 UTC+2 skrev bassam king karzeddin:
> >>>> On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 12:00:52 PM UTC+3, Zelos Malum wrote:
> >>>>> Dipshit, there are no approximations! Show us one fucking approximation
> >>>>> ever in these!

> >>>>
> >>>> I'am who is asking to show only one existing triangle with EXACTLY know
> >>>> sides such that one of its angles is integer degree angle (n), where (n)
> >>>> is simply not divisible by (3)
> >>>>
> >>>> BKK

> >>>
> >>> how about a triangle with angles 1, 2 and 97 degrees? Nothing inexact
> >>> there, give the side opposite of the 1 degree angle length 1, then the
> >>> length of the other two sides are L_2=1*sin(2 degrees)/sin(1 degrees) and
> >>> L_97=1*sin(97 degrees)/sin(1 degrees)
> >>>
> >>> EXACTLY, no approximations there.
> >>>
> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_sines
> >>>
> >>> Holy shit, you failed basic geometry and are an engineer? Tell me what
> >>> you've made so I know what to stay away from! They must be deathtraps
> >>> considering how incompetent in basic mathematics you are.

> >>
> >> ...and the three angles of a triangle all add up to?

> >
> > COmplete and utter brainfart on my side, you are absolutely correct, of
> > course I meant 1, 2 and 177, replace the numbers and it is correct.
> >
> > Thank you for correcting it.

>
> It seemed a silly correction to make, but I couldn't help myself. It is
> obvious to me that you know what you are talking about and it was, as
> you said, a brain fart.


Well small corrections like those gives the cranks less of a reason to get hung up on.