You are not logged in.

 Discussion: All Topics Topic: Is a rhombus a kite?

 Post a new topic to the General Discussion in Geometry discussion
 << see all messages in this topic < previous message | next message >

 Subject: RE: Is a rhombus a kite? Author: Mathman Date: May 20 2005
On May 20 2005, Pi wrote:
>All joking a
> side, I agree with Tusk definition of a kite. I am part of a
> research group and had to post a message.

No joking:  There is no good reason to *exclude* the rhombus any more than there
is reason to exclude the integers from the set of rational numbers, which
contains the fractions, and they are in fact not excluded.  Integers have all of
the properties of rational numbers, and so are rational numbers.  The rhombus
has *all* of the properties [and more] of the set of objects shaped like a kite;
having two distinct, but perhaps even equal, pairs of isosceles sides.  If there
is any property of the kite shape NOT possessed by the rhombus, then the rhombus
is not a kite shape, and there is not.  Again, the two pairs of adjacent and
equal sides are distinct, but can still be equal.  An integer can be written in
the form of a fraction; a fraction of the form a/1, or even a/b if a is a
multiple of b, not zero, is an integer.  In particular, the rational number a/a
= 1, and is unique, but still a fraction, and still an integer.  A rational
number is of the form a/b; even if a = b it is still a rational number.  A
quadrilateral with two sides "a", and two "b" is a "kite", even if a = b.

David.