Is this a Triangle? It’s NOT.…see why…

[@TKRM2007]

The image is a triangle but the values (units) incorrect.

[@jamesallen74]

Stated differently, while the white triangle shape you drew on your drawing software IS a triangle, a triangle with those lengths cannot exist.

[@damnhandy]

If the three sides were curved arcs instead of straight lines, you would have a 3D triangle. For instance, draw a triangle on a ball.

[@larrystuder8543]

The 3 lines form a triangle. The dimensions are wrong, they define a triangle that cannot be constructed.

[@bobcornwell403]

The two shorter sides add up to less than the long side.

[@damnhandy]

The squares of the two shorter sides combined must equal the square of the third side. A squared plus B squared must equal C squared. A triangle of 3,4,5 is a right triangle because 9+16=25 but 3+4 does not = 5

[@shawnchanner8894]

This tutorial system males learning easy. I think everyone should try this system

[@evng9368]

The sum of Two sides should be always larger than the third one.

[@thomasharding1838]

The problem is not that it is not a triangle! The problem is that when he drew the triangle, he mis-wrote the "8" side dimension. It is not 8 but 10.8. Simple slip-up. Also, the visual proportions could be better. The "2" side is half the length of the "8" side. The preceding assume the top angle is a right angle, but if it is not, then the given dimensions being incorrect still holds, just maybe not the "8" be "10.8 but something else greater than 9.

[@waltdill927]

It is a typical "untrue" triangle, since nominally invalid. Conversely, the worst triangle ever drawn, even if the segments are warped or deliberately disconnected at the vertices, is an atypical "true" triangle -- according to labeling or other convention. So, any triangle, regardless of accuracy of rendition, is invalid if nominally mislabeled; but any triangle, however and to what degree not an accurate or typical triangle, is valid if nominally labeled or otherwise conventionally indicated as such.

[@reysanmiguel6016]

Your explanation is too slow. Pls do not talk too much!

[@v-gc7257]

Wish we had this tutorial back when I was a kid Very helpful

[@ivan-j4l9x]

Well just the internet in general. My 6 yr old is already doing algebra. The challenge for next generation is being able to focus with so many distractions.

[@micheldefays9850]

11 minutes to states the OBVIOUS !!! Not to mention nothing worthwhile in the first two minutes, and the advertising? Definitely did not subscribe.

[@haveutriedwater]

... you called it a triangle at least three times though

[@damnhandy]

8x8 = 64 2x2=4 11x11=121 but 64+4 does not = 121 nor does 4+121 = 64 Therefore this cannot be a triangle.

[@froictor5586]

The real question is : "Triangle, what is it" " géométrie, what is it ?" What is Euclide ?

[@gtg1018]

Again, 11 minutes for a 2 minute explanation. Draw an 8 units radius arc from the bottom left corner to intersect the base. The intersection point is 8 units from the bottom left corner. The remaining segment is 3 units long. Now if you draw a 2 units arc from the bottom right corner it will fall short, so you would never be able to build the triangle. Two simple rules: in a triangle, a side is always smaller than the sum of the other two and always bigger than their difference.

[@bandini22221]

So if it's not a triangle, what is it? Just a polygon?

[@tascrphs]

Love your work. Considering the complete abundance of awful teaching in Mid & Highschool, you are doing a great service sir. Keep it up and i can see your library evolving into a portfolio of studies that are schools systems license to supplement their substandard programs. I may not be an educator, but having once created a HS in the northeast I know a little about schools.

[@34damnian47]

7

[@damnhandy]

A triangle with those three sides, 2, 8, and 11 could have a triangular footprint of the three points matching the drawing, but the actual "sides" of the triangle would be arcs. In other words, you could machine a 3 dimensional shape that had a triangular bottom that matched the drawing, but it would not be flat. Just start with a 21inch wire, and make a bend in the wire at 11 inches, then make another bend in the 10inch side, then tack-weld the two end of the wire together. Then tack-weld each point onto a sheet of steel, and voila! You have a 3D triangle.

[@cosettelitvik]

Kol

[@X3NTIC]

First