Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
PsiSeeker

Sneaky teaching

Recommended Posts

PsiSeeker

Very strange way a school teacher had of positing this fact.  Right on the cusp of intrinsically acquiring English as my second language in high school.  The oddness of word enunciation, pronouncing.  The category square is what is implied, which should be clear to see.  16 Years slow on that I am.  Oh well, depth mathematics takes some time.

Also, considering depth, or deep persons, i ponder how such things relate to Philosophy in the manner of every man having some sort of presentation for their life by some philosopher in their writings or by way of their philosophy.  I'm not sure if such a thing holds steadfast in camera view.  Shall be interesting to seem.  (Objective reality is an archaic way of speech.  "CAMERA VIEW" specifically where the definition for camera is akin to Computer Science however as the word falls from the definition in English one must be wary of such things as idioms.  Else Tower of Babel 101 baby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
HandsomeGorilla

Speaking of languages, which one is this? 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy

@PsiSeeker, are you sure they didn’t say: ‘a rectangle is sometimes a square.’?

Because saying a rectangle is a square is incorrect.

A square is always a rectangle, but a rectangle is only a square when all sides are equal.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
XenoFish
19 minutes ago, HandsomeGorilla said:

Speaking of languages, which one is this? 

I can't much sense of it either. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker

The class square includes the entity square and the entity rectangle.  In actual fact you find that without certain notions it becomes fundamentally impossible to distinguish a rectangle from a square.  It is an extra entity that also happens to be a square.  2D is 1 dimensional, from its own perspective.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
33 minutes ago, PsiSeeker said:

The class square includes the entity square and the entity rectangle.  In actual fact you find that without certain notions it becomes fundamentally impossible to distinguish a rectangle from a square.  It is an extra entity that also happens to be a square.  2D is 1 dimensional, from its own perspective.

Yes, you look at any 2D shape on a 1D plane, and depending on your perspective, it could always have the exact same length, or a different length. Length of the line is all you have in 1D.
 

You need to explain yourself better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
6 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

Very strange way a school teacher had of positing this fact.  Right on the cusp of intrinsically acquiring English as my second language in high school.  The oddness of word enunciation, pronouncing.  The category square is what is implied, which should be clear to see.  16 Years slow on that I am.  Oh well, depth mathematics takes some time.

Also, considering depth, or deep persons, i ponder how such things relate to Philosophy in the manner of every man having some sort of presentation for their life by some philosopher in their writings or by way of their philosophy.  I'm not sure if such a thing holds steadfast in camera view.  Shall be interesting to seem.  (Objective reality is an archaic way of speech.  "CAMERA VIEW" specifically where the definition for camera is akin to Computer Science however as the word falls from the definition in English one must be wary of such things as idioms.  Else Tower of Babel 101 baby.

What fact did the teacher post? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
1 hour ago, PsiSeeker said:

The class square includes the entity square and the entity rectangle.  In actual fact you find that without certain notions it becomes fundamentally impossible to distinguish a rectangle from a square.  It is an extra entity that also happens to be a square.  2D is 1 dimensional, from its own perspective.

In math one dimension is a single dot in space.  what you call 2D is a line in space, or multiple lines on the same plane that could make up a square or a rectangle or triangle or trapezoid, etc.  I believe you when you mention that English is your second language.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oslove
On 6/18/2020 at 4:19 PM, PsiSeeker said:

Sneaky teaching

A rectangle is a square

By PsiSeeker, June 18 in Philosophy and Psychology

________________

 

Very strange way a school teacher had of positing this fact.  Right on the cusp of intrinsically acquiring English as my second language in high school.  The oddness of word enunciation, pronouncing.  The category square is what is implied, which should be clear to see.  16 Years slow on that I am.  Oh well, depth mathematics takes some time.

Also, considering depth, or deep persons, i ponder how such things relate to Philosophy in the manner of every man having some sort of presentation for their life by some philosopher in their writings or by way of their philosophy.  I'm not sure if such a thing holds steadfast in camera view.  Shall be interesting to seem.  (Objective reality is an archaic way of speech.  "CAMERA VIEW" specifically where the definition for camera is akin to Computer Science however as the word falls from the definition in English one must be wary of such things as idioms.  Else Tower of Babel 101 baby.

 

Dear PsiSeeker, I submit that an OP should be as brief but as substance orientated as possible, and in clear simple language and style.

I love to ask you to redraft in just 40 words as your brief OP, if and when you reply to me.

And just put your new OP in your post replying to my post here.

 

 

On 6/18/2020 at 4:19 PM, PsiSeeker said:

About Me

Extremely curious with the tendency to wall and wall of text that feels just...  Normal to me...  I like to chat about ideas I guess, if anything I say catches the interest of anyone to chat about, rather than fact checking too much.  I primarily want to develop my capacity to reason with others, rather than fact checking with, seeing as I'm looking for things that are unexplained, which may have Wikipedia roots, or roots elsewhere, should there be scholars and researchers around who like to investigate, however I feel like there's something about "reading too much fact" that takes away from the ability to reason something out to something.  I.e it's not my intention to come with mysteries discovered, or mysteries I've resolved, or have ideas about, however merely things that I find mysterious, and attempt to produce ideas surrounding it to hack away at with others (or on my own, I'm open to critique :)) (I think this is a bad habit I developed from playing endless game races on the website www.typeracer.com, I tried to determine my texting speed, which seems to be around 80wpm, when I'm in a state of flow and aiming for speed, max.  The typing speed I reached (bot tested against, is 187wpm with about 97% accuracy since I was going flat out.  Perhaps some parts of the endless texts I typed (without really reading) created some subconscious impression within me that has since resulted in these endless words that don't really say that much.  Hard to explain, it's akin to being able to talk one's way through something by "thinking out loud" however most of my "out loud" is brain stormy and idea testing tends to be unbelievably wordy without saying much (loquacious I think is the word) Meyer's personality persona (I don't know what the difference between persona and personality is) is INTP though this is asking about me, not really my personality.

Hmm, I'm 28, Male, Father to be on the 14th May 2019 (projected) I have been a part of this Site since I was a teenager (13) and immensely enjoy sharing some of my deepest thoughts, ideas and notions.  I tend to go through periods of very inconsistent activity (I'm very high in Openness but really rather low in Conscientiousness if one were to take the Big 5 personality model as a guiding post regarding my tendencies in relation to this site in particular.  Feel free to check some Instagram videos where I'm in a similar state of chatty idea testing however specifically limited to 200 words on average (1 minute chats with 200 word limit given average talking speed of 200wpm)

 

https://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/profile/8253-psiseeker/?tab=field_core_pfield_14

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56

@oslove do you really need to "shout"?  What's with the large print bolded?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
oslove
15 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

@oslove do you really need to "shout"?  What's with the large print bolded?

I sincerely apologize for the big font, I noticed it but could not succeed to reduce it to the same size as with the rest of my message.

In fact I noticed upon preview that there are three sizes of font in my post of concern.

What I did was to copy from other places of the webpage, so that my words are really very few and they turned out to be in conspicuously big font size.

To all readers and posters, please bear with me, no  shouting intended, but yes I do say something that I know could be unpleasant to the author of the thread.

I just returned to this forum after some years of absence, and am not as skillful as I was before.

[Joined May 26, 2008]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
Just now, oslove said:

I sincerely apologize for the big font, I noticed it but could not succeed to reduce it to the same size as with the rest of my message.

In fact I noticed upon preview that there are three sizes of font in my post of concern.

What I did was to copy from other places of the webpage, so that my words are really very few and they turned out to be in conspicuously big font size.

To all readers and posters, please bear with me, no  shouting intended, but yes I do say something that I know could be unpleasant to the author of the thread.

I just returned to this forum after some years of absence, and am not as skillful as I was before.

[Joined May 26, 2008]

OK.  I understand.  That has happened to me.  If the text is not in a quote box you usually can highlight it and use the Size button on the right side of the menu at the top of your post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
PsiSeeker

Here's the proof in physics, and you all fail math haha.

E equals m C squared.  Take a square, in the middle write C squared.  Now write C on one side of the square and C on the adjacent side.  Light travels away from light at the speed of light.  There you have it.  A rectangle is a square.

**** me, talk about tough crowd.  These aren't my words.  It's just something I was taught, grappled with, and finally saw clearly.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker

Take it up with the Australian, Queensland teaching curriculum if you want, after heading your way through two multi cultural societies and finding yourself in one of the most prostigious regions in earth.  This topic shall forever stand as a glowing showcase of what the intellect does when it is severely outclassed.  I stand in shame alongside all of you.  Philosophy as a forum and we all post so haphazardly.  We're supposed to form the literature for it, and it is a joke, to say the least.  Psychology henseforth is my posting, and shame is my standing on this day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker
On 6/18/2020 at 11:27 PM, Timothy said:

Yes, you look at any 2D shape on a 1D plane, and depending on your perspective, it could always have the exact same length, or a different length. Length of the line is all you have in 1D.
 

You need to explain yourself better.

Incorrect.  It is precisely as it states.  A square is a rectangle.  If this is a point where one finds argument then it is indicative of a fundamental limitation one has in mathematics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker
On 6/18/2020 at 7:05 PM, Timothy said:

@PsiSeeker, are you sure they didn’t say: ‘a rectangle is sometimes a square.’?

Because saying a rectangle is a square is incorrect.

A square is always a rectangle, but a rectangle is only a square when all sides are equal.

You're missing the point.  A square is a rectangle, now, despite what you might think, prove it.  You can do it with physics and Albert Einstein's E equals mc squared with the knowledge that a photon travels away from a photon at the speed of itself.  You get a rectangle and a square and thus a square is a rectangle.  This is a proof I can perform in computer science.  I don't make the axioms or whatever.  Proof theory in mathematics is difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker
On 7/15/2020 at 8:43 AM, oslove said:

 

Dear PsiSeeker, I submit that an OP should be as brief but as substance orientated as possible, and in clear simple language and style.

I love to ask you to redraft in just 40 words as your brief OP, if and when you reply to me.

And just put your new OP in your post replying to my post here.

 

 

 

I'll consider your posting once it stops registering as all caps.

 

Inside voices please Donovan haha.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker
Posted (edited)
On 6/19/2020 at 12:26 AM, Desertrat56 said:

What fact did the teacher post? 

A rectangle is a square; it is commutative ;).

But of intellectual showboating with the ;, **** I hate when I do that, can't help it, oh well 

Edited by PsiSeeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker

Obviously I'll get my ass beat to a bloody pull with a thread like this so I want to be specific by saying to consider all of the postings as a psychological and psychiatric thing.  Not philosophical

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Timothy
3 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

Incorrect.  It is precisely as it states.  A square is a rectangle.  If this is a point where one finds argument then it is indicative of a fundamental limitation one has in mathematics.

3 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

You're missing the point.  A square is a rectangle, now, despite what you might think, prove it.  You can do it with physics and Albert Einstein's E equals mc squared with the knowledge that a photon travels away from a photon at the speed of itself.  You get a rectangle and a square and thus a square is a rectangle.  This is a proof I can perform in computer science.  I don't make the axioms or whatever.  Proof theory in mathematics is difficult.

Yes, like I said, a square is always a rectangle.

You posted in your topic description: ‘A rectangle is a square’.

You’re not doing any intellectual showboating here, your English reading comprehension skills are a testament to that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker
1 hour ago, Timothy said:

Yes, like I said, a square is always a rectangle.

You posted in your topic description: ‘A rectangle is a square’.

You’re not doing any intellectual showboating here, your English reading comprehension skills are a testament to that. 

What derives from there are several notions one utilises in arithmetic such as that of what is commutative and, likewise, associativity.

You should be careful not to include the potential of sarcasm in your answers.  You'll be surprised to find out English has no subconscious body language facets to it and my first language, Afrikaans, likewise; I read the word whole ;).  It's at a stretch where you'll be able to provide context for the reader who has Asperger's Syndrome.  And they might not be as forgiving as I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Desertrat56
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, PsiSeeker said:

A rectangle is a square; it is commutative ;).

But of intellectual showboating with the ;, **** I hate when I do that, can't help it, oh well 

No, a square has a definite definition.  You have it backwards, a square is a rectangle but not all rectangles are squares.  Do you know the properties of a square?

Edited by Desertrat56
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
On 7/28/2020 at 6:41 PM, PsiSeeker said:

You're missing the point.  A square is a rectangle, now, despite what you might think, prove it.  You can do it with physics and Albert Einstein's E equals mc squared with the knowledge that a photon travels away from a photon at the speed of itself.  You get a rectangle and a square and thus a square is a rectangle.  This is a proof I can perform in computer science.  I don't make the axioms or whatever.  Proof theory in mathematics is difficult.

All you need for a rectangle is that all four corners are 90 degrees.  The rest of the properties follow this; such as: the diagonals are equal, and the opposite sides are prrallel.

A square is a special type of rectangle.  All of the above attributes are true with the additional attribute that all sides are equal.

You kind of sound like you're alluding to Lorrentz Transformations.  But, the squares and rectangles are defined Euclid's first book.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PsiSeeker

Adjacent side, Jesus Christ I almighty.  I have no idea what the adjacent side would actually be, I implied the perpendicular side however my ADHD has been running strong A.F. lately, that is, inconsistent medication due to myself not being listened to, the experts know best, (I pray to **** that's the case because I don't want to go back to taking a medication that includes "sudden death" as one of its side effects criteria.  Side effects criteria, that's me using big words, outside of that I'm not.  I don't know what side effects criteria actually means, and I feel rather posh stating it like so, excessive.  I now and again, when the cash is plentiful, visit a teach me how to write better mmkay thing.  If I write worse now than I did when I first joined this site then I don't know where to start other than I don't really fundamentally care about my ability to write when what I want is to partake in a discussion of ideas where imparting the gist of it is mindbogglingly difficult just in passing.  If one need ask which perpendicular side then once more, fail mathematics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
PsiSeeker
On 7/30/2020 at 3:51 PM, Golden Duck said:

All you need for a rectangle is that all four corners are 90 degrees.  The rest of the properties follow this; such as: the diagonals are equal, and the opposite sides are prrallel.

A square is a special type of rectangle.  All of the above attributes are true with the additional attribute that all sides are equal.

You kind of sound like you're alluding to Lorrentz Transformations.  But, the squares and rectangles are defined Euclid's first book.

You're missing the point, too, haha.  There's no nothing of size, extra information that need not be provided is being provided.  A rectangle is a square loses the holistic of the memorability required to ingrain it, one won't recall, and hardly register, without stating it appropriately if learned.

A square is a rectangle.

Knowing with a square is and knowing what a rectangle is what can we say is missing?  The notion of magnitude, there is none and, as it turns out, it's impossible to talk of it without throwing algebra out of the window.  Eventually one runs into Einstein's formula regardless or one utilises bull **** tactics in proof theory.  Use the language as it states, with the axiom given, what can be said?  It's a basis from which to form Discrete Mathematics utilising the notion of a concept that's probably not meant to be anything other than an introduction to Topology I imagine.

Regarding the complexity, nothing beyond grade school mathematics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.