Trisecting an angle
 

I believe that it is impossible to trisect an acute angle, using only a
straight edge and a compass.
However i can demonstrate how to do it, it is quite simple in fact.
I submitted the idea to some math sites, but they don't seem
to believe it.
Anybody interested ? (its not just a joke or crackpot idea)

Would [url=http://www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/HistTopics/Trisecting_an_angle.html]this[/url] help?

Also on trisection.
 

I just noticed your thread.
I too have a method of trisection for compass' and unmarked ruler(straight-edge). A proof is more dependent , and difficult in my thinking '
of adding three angles , as for instance in 90 degrees, as ONTO,for all angles in that region, and forming a homeomorphism with the trisection.
I have also created an analog trisection tool, which can be used to circumvent the above in a Euclidean type proof, I believe.
The method of trisection does not appear , whatsoever in the suggested reading.
JH

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr]I just noticed your thread.
I too have a method of trisection for compass' and unmarked ruler(straight-edge). A proof is more dependent , and difficult in my thinking '
of adding three angles , as for instance in 90 degrees, as ONTO,for all angles in that region, and forming a homeomorphism with the trisection.
I have also created an analog trisection tool, which can be used to circumvent the above in a Euclidean type proof, I believe.
The method of trisection does not appear , whatsoever in the suggested reading.
JH[/QUOTE]

Take a few too many quaaludes?

To last reply
 

Dont understand question just posted.
Drug cop out should be banned from this forum.

Yeah, you're so right. Serious people with a solid mathematical knowledge demonstrated continuously by sound, complete and precise comments and answers to questions should actually be *banned*, and unrecognised geniuses like yourself, mr. Hill, should be the *only* ones allowed here. This should be the Unrecognised Ahead-of-his-time Genius Worldwide Forum.

> This should be the Unrecognised Ahead-of-his-time Genius Worldwide Forum.

Yeah, but we call it "Miscellaneous Math Threads."

Alex

[QUOTE=David John Hill Jr]Dont understand question just posted.
[/QUOTE]

Your post was not mathematics.
It was not even mathematical gibberish.
It was not even meaningful prose in any sense.
It was pseudo-babble. It appeared as if you randomly selected
a few verbs, surrounded them with nouns whose meaning you
clearly did not understand, and tried to present the result as
mathematics.

It appeared to have been written by someone spaced out on drugs.

Does this make my question clear???

Mr. Hill is a bot, methinks.

Is anyone interested? Start of thread
 

This is the question and person I am responding to, at the outset of the thread.If others might have the patience for a response,even if till November, it would be appreciated.

In my defence,elsewise:

As far as Dr Silverman's comments are concerned, I sympathize-my Seminar Teacher at my Alma Mater, to whom I originally sent a copy of my original submission
to this forum, refused to read past the first few lines because of vagueness
at the outset.(2002)
As far as drugs , my dad on his death bed advised me to stay away from illegal drugs. I have , except in unavoidable environmental impositions, similar to second hand smoke. I resent in totum the imposers.What comes around , goes around,and in that I don't even want exposure.There were days I woke up not able to focus on the sun , and what was coming through the walls had obviously done its harm.
As far as having toleration and speed on a computer key board or plasma screen, I don't. I have to watch the key board to type, and by the time I
often look up , the screen is Tim-buck too. And there is more,in that often by the time I have waited for the computer to act, and stared at the screen, my personal body is going into in insulin shock, my eye implants are not able to focus , and quickness on the computer is the last thing I need to respond to.
As far as Gerunds and Gerundives, too much , sorry. When hail bop came around, bonoculars saw more of an image than the haze through a powerful telescope. On 4 space, I have researched, made drawings, determined pertinent parameters for years, on paper ,all of it. The illusion that some things cannot be determined, without illusive drugs, is TOTALLY false.
As far as 'genius',false. When I lived in a 220 volt environment my IQ was average. After re exposure to 110 ,my IQ jumped 17 points, but at least 30 points short of any reference to a genius IQ.
Meanwhile, I have been dabbling in the trisection problem for at least 12 years,more or less peaking in 1999, and would enjoy a detailed ,developing discussion, however meandering it might be. 'I'm in no hurry', 3000 is a long way off, with 4000 lingering in the background even further.
(And sarcastically , if we haven't killed ourselves off , with the likes of out of control drugs and polution)
(As far as anyone wanting copies of my sketchy work, I have a few copies-at a price, just let me know-as long as you wish to develope your own acumen therefrom , and not prey on me, as the source from aloof,your welcome to contact me-its just one man's hodge -podge of perspectives,currently, but I find the world catching up,and refining it,either with consternation or disconsternation,as I try to catch up to the world)

I have to say, trying to figure out what David is trying to tell us can be quite a fascinating exercise. "hail bop" - neat! Maybe his posting belong in the Puzzles forum rather than Math, or Miscellaneous Math.

Alex

All hail the mighty bop! I don't think any amount of quaaludes could induce someone to come up with something that good - that's just sheer natural (or perhaps preternatural is the better word) ability there.

Speaking only for myself, the one and only time I attempted to trisect an Angle, his Saxon and Frisian buddies all drew their swords and came after me in a most distressingly rude fashion. No, really! The only way I managed to get away was to engage in silly running-about-on-bent-knees behavior (all while mercilessly taunting my pursuers, at least until I ran out of breath with which to do so - I managed to get in the one about the hamster and the elderberries, though), and finally to jump the English channel to safety. Oh, and "English" channel is of course a pompous Britischer misnomer - as everyone outside of England knows it's really the Sleeve Channel, sogennant because we wily French types, we always having something up our sleeves, mais non? (Fetchez la vache!) Oui, I tol' heem we already got one - yes, it's a-verray nice! Now, go away, or ah shall have to trisect you a second time, you so-called ruler of the English compass with your banging coconut halves, allegedly carried here by swallows with strands of creeper attached to the dorsal guiding feathers. 'Ow stupid do you theenk we clever French types are?

Just great. Now I have that Hensons song stuck in my head.

AAAAAAAAaaaaaahhhhhhhh!

Alex

[QUOTE=akruppa]Just great. Now I have that Hensons song stuck in my head.

AAAAAAAAaaaaaahhhhhhhh!

Alex[/QUOTE]Judging only only the lyrics, that sounds more like the theme song from "Flash Gordon", as sung by Queen:

[i]Flash! AAAAAAAAaaaaaahhhhhhhh![/i]

Classic movie, that. Quite possibly the best gay SciFi opera co-starring Max von Sydow and some corn-fed Iowa-quarterback type wearing really titey-whitey pants and a personalized "Flash!" T-shirt *ever*.