# Teorema pitagora online dating

*04-Jul-2017 11:46*

Basically your long explanation resolves this inconsistency.Even so, the length of your fill-in does indicate to me that using determinants is still contrary to the intentions of the Pythagorean theorem, even if it isn’t truly circular.(Indeed, one can verify that the map is a functor in the category of Hilbert spaces.) If one then uses an orthonormal basis on V to generate an orthonormal basis of via wedge products I think you then get the claim.Whether this is the “simple” proof of the theorem depends on your taste, I guess. It seems this proof (in one form or another) has quite a long history, dating back to Euclid himself.Then you can take the determinant of 0, M^T],[-M, I in two ways.

You can either do a block row operation to see that its determinant is det M^T M; or you can group the terms in its determinant to get a sum of squares of minors.

]]But there is also a proof, which may or may not be an equivalent proof, that uses only undergraduate linear algebra and geometry.Unless I’m missing something, could it be that showing this is where the effort in the proof comes in?There is an interesting story that goes with this proof.The Pythagorean theorem confirms the analytic definition of plane geometry using the axioms of synthetic geometry.

But expressing areas with determinants relies on analytic geometry.

Dear Rupert, ADC is similar to ACB because they have two angles in common (a right angle, and the angle at A). Since two triangles that are similar to a third are also similar to each other, the claim follows.