Debating the Validity of the Inscribed Hexagon Theorem

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter crocque
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Inscribed Hexagon Theorem, specifically the relationship between the radius of a circle circumscribed about a regular hexagon and the sides of the hexagon. Participants explore the validity of the theorem and its implications, with some expressing frustration over the terminology used.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant asserts that the radius of the circle is equal to the sides of the regular inscribed hexagon, emphasizing the need for discussion despite the theorem's long-standing history.
  • Another participant agrees with the assertion about the radius and sides but critiques the terminology, suggesting "inscribed in a circle" is clearer than "inside a regular inscribed hexagon."
  • A third participant expresses confusion, expecting the discussion to relate to linear algebra rather than geometry.
  • There is a claim that one participant was not forthcoming with their ideas, leading to accusations of trolling and justifying the thread's potential lock.
  • Another participant challenges the notion of restricting original research and free thinking within the discussion.
  • One participant clarifies that the discussion is not related to linear algebra.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the validity of the theorem and the appropriateness of the terminology used. There is no consensus on whether the discussion should continue, with some wanting to end it while others wish to explore the topic further.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not fully resolved the implications of the theorem or the terminology used, leading to potential misunderstandings. The discussion also touches on the boundaries of original research within the forum.

crocque
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
My theorem is right. "Inside a regular inscribed hexagon, the radius of the circle IS equal to the sides of the hexagon"

You can lock the thread, but poeple wanted to discuss this. Maybe it is 2000 years old and that's why it's still up for debate. Can we please discuss it? I said nothing of Pi.
 
Physics news on Phys.org


Yes, it is true that the radius of a circle circumscribed about a regular hexagon, is the same as the side of the hexagon. Yes, you could phrase that as a "regularly inscribed hexagon" but it would be better to say "inscribed in a circle". And the word "Inside" confuses things greatly! And while you did not say anything about pi in the thread, the title, "Why pi is wrong" was questionable!

Now that we understand what you were saying, and agree that it is right, I see no reason to continue the thread.
 


i thought this was going to be an application of linear algebra to censorship.
 


crocque, you were trolling us hard. We asked you multiple times to present all of your stuff, but you refused to do so. The lock was justified.

And by the way, we don't allow original research here...
 


Okay, Micro. Let's not get our panties in a wad. No original research. No free thinking allowed.
 


This is not about linear algebra.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 81 ·
3
Replies
81
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
8K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K