Skip to main content
Report this ad

See also:

Some thoughts about triangles

A Right Triangle
A Right Triangle
Martin Nelson

For some unknown reason, this author has been dreaming, yes dreaming, of triangles. It seems frightfully silly to have such dreams (which have even been truly bordering on nightmares). Anyhow, I would like to share with you some thoughts on triangles.

First, some consider the wheel is one of man’s first inventions. Personally, I find this questionable. A snowball will roll down a hill in a similar fashion as a wheel will roll. A rock, tree limb, or even turtle on its side can also roll down a hill in a fashion of a wheel. For man to invent a wheel does not seem much of an invention as just about any hill in winter can reveal a wheel-type apparatus. However, staring out the window has revealed no cases of naturally occurring right-triangles; as far as I know, there is not one, single incident of a naturally occurring right-triangle.

Thus, second, the math formula for a right triangle is old. In mathematics, the Pythagoras' theorem states “that the square of the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the squares of the other two sides.” However, this fact was known by the Babylonians much, much earlier. “Four Babylonian tablets, circa 1900–1600 BC, indicate some knowledge of the theorem, or at least of special integers known as Pythagorean triples that satisfy it. Similarly, the Rhind papyrus, dating from about 1650 BC but known to be a copy of a 200-year-old document, indicates that the Egyptians knew about the theorem. “ Furthermore, did you know that the Pythagoras’s theorem is omnipotent over all right-triangles (all right-triangles are under its influence), and it is omnipresent because is it over all right-triangles throughout all time?

Third, in a naturalistic, Darwinian worldview, exactly how did the triangle evolve? Was the triangle a result of the Big Bang thingy or was the Big Bang thingy subject to whatever empowers Pythagoras’s theorem? At one time, was the formula saying the hypotenuse was less than the sum of the squared sides or more? In the future, as evolution dictates, will the formula state the hypotenuse is more than the sum or less? Bazar to think, is it not?

Finally, fourth is the niftiest thing about right triangles. The area of a right-triangle is equal to one-half the base times the height. Pretty simple actually. Did you know that Darwin claimed that “After fourteen thousand generations, six new species, marked by the letters n14 to z14 [as seen in his diagram], are supposed to have been produced”? That seems like a lot, but if we consider the branch of mammals (5,416 assumed in 2006) divided by 6 (six species after each 14,000 generations) and then multiply by 14,000, we get 12,273,333 generations to get the mammals. Using our right-triangle area, we take one-half of 12,273,333 (6,381,666) time 5,416 and get 34,563,103,056 fossils. Even if they have located and documented 5,000 intermediate life forms, it is still a very small percent to equate it as a fact. (Oh, Wikipedia references only 19 fossils for mammal macro-evolutionary proof).

If you would like to receive an email when new articles are published please consider subscribing by clicking the blue subscribe link located under the photo that accompanies this article.

Report this ad