barcodeaddin.com

The telling of mathematics in .NET Get barcode code39 in .NET The telling of mathematics




How to generate, print barcode using .NET, Java sdk library control with example project source code free download:
The telling of mathematics generate, create code 39 none with .net projects ISO Specification In short, later generation .net framework Code 39 s have selected to preserve pedagogic works, have added pedagogic works to the mathematical corpus, and have produced a body of commentary that tends to depersonalize each individual work and that, in aggregate, depersonalizes the corpus as a whole. Mathematics, the impersonal discipline par excellence, came to its own in the sixth century ad, to shape from then on our very image of the eld and to blind us to the Hellenistic phenomenon of ludic proof.

. c h a p t er 3 Hybrids and mosaics Euclid s Elements stand ou t, among Hellenistic mathematical works, in their pedagogic intent. Yet their very end book xiii already suggests the ludic, and at the very end is a theorem, attached as a kind of appendix, that would have been worthy of Archimedes. The theorem is often considered to have been discovered early (though its form may be due to Euclid himself, or even to some later reader of him).

However this may be, it may serve as an example of an important compositional phenomenon: the mosaic proof. Here then is the proof that there are exactly ve regular solids (adapted from Heath s translation):. ( ) For a solid angle cann .net vs 2010 barcode 3 of 9 ot be constructed with two triangles (or, in general, <two> planes). [This is based on a de nition in book xi and in principle represents a fundamental three-dimensional intuition.

] ( ) With three triangles the angle of the pyramid is constructed, with four the angle of the octahedron, and with ve the angle of the icosahedron [this moves into the mode of exhaustive survey]; ( ) but a solid angle cannot be formed by six equilateral and equiangular triangles placed together at one point, ( ) for, the angle of the equilateral triangle being two-thirds of a right angle, ( ) the six will be equal to four right angles: ( ) which is impossible, ( ) for any solid angle is contained by angles less than four right angles. [Step is a result proved at Elements xi. .

For the fantastic argumentative structure of Steps , see in more detail below.] ( ) So, for the same reasons, a solid angle cannot be constructed by more than six plane angles. ( ) By three squares the angle of the cube is contained, ( ) but by four it is impossible for a solid angle to be contained, ( ) for they will again be four right angles.

( ) By three equilateral and equiangular pentagons the angle of the dodecahedron is contained, ( ) but by four such it is impossible for any solid angle to be formed, ( ) for, the angle of the equilateral pentagon being a right angle and a. A sloppy statement: the me aning is that a solid angle cannot be formed by more than six plane angles under the conditions of a regular solid. With this proviso attached, Step is a valid a fortiori conclusion from Step . It is however otiose, as stronger claims will be made in the following (is it an interpolation ).

. Hybrids and mosaics fth, ( ) the four angle s will be greater than four right angles: ( ) which is impossible. ( ) Neither again will a solid angle be contained by other polygonal gures, ( ) by reason of the same absurdity..

This delightful propositio .net framework Code 3/9 n which as it were keeps tearing up and building toy polyhedra in our mind s eye also keeps tearing up and building connections between diverse domains of proof. The thread running through the proof is that of exhaustive survey: a eld of possibilities is divided up and surveyed until it is exhausted, whereupon certainty is attained.

Within this thread runs a basic set of three-dimensional intuitions: that a solid angle is contained by at least three plane angles, whose sums are less than four right angles (whose meeting-up makes not a solid angle, but a plane). Note that this intuition is compelling, but not as obvious as some plane geometry intuitions are. It takes a positive effort of imagination to convince ourselves of the validity of this assumption, and so it is felt to be actively present in the course of the proof, rather than forming some kind of neutral background.

Further, one repeatedly requires results in plane geometry: the size of the angles for equiangular polygons. We take it for granted in the course of this proof that the triangle s is two-thirds a right angle, the square s a right angle, and the pentagon s a right angle and a fth (the hexagon s right-and-a-third is left implicit). The result for the pentagon is assigned to a following lemma, that for the square is too obvious to call for any argument, that for the triangle is left as a quick and very straightforward exercise for the reader.

In all cases, plane geometry is called to the fore. Finally, the proof repeatedly invokes the very different eld of calculation, of a more complex type than we would have in the same context. Euclid counts his angles in the units of right angles, so that the calculation of fractions is required: two-thirds make four when multiplied by six, one and a fth goes over four when multiplied by four, and (implicitly) one and a third for the hexagon makes four already when multiplied by three.

Consider again Steps : ( ) but a solid angle cannot be formed by six equilateral and equiangular triangles placed together at one point, ( ) for, the angle of the equilateral triangle being two-thirds of a right angle, ( ) the six will be equal to four right angles: ( ) which is impossible, ( ) for any solid angle is contained by angles less than four right angles. . The text provides a furthe r lemma proving this result, which is strictly speaking redundant: all that is required is that the angle of the pentagon is greater than the angle of the square, and it appears that Euclid takes for granted (in the concluding Steps ) that the more-sided polygon has the greater angle. Once again, the proviso under the conditions of a regular solid is tacitly assumed..

Copyright © barcodeaddin.com . All rights reserved.