a triangle has:

>3 sides

>3 angles

>the sum of the angles is equal to 180

Now, imagine a triangle with 2 angles of 0 and one of 180, with all 3 sides occupying the same space - BOOM, you've got a line, which is also a triangle.

line has zero area, all shapes have an area

try again

>>15364566 (OP)

1-Dimensional perception is wierd, especially when looking at the mirror or other people...ditections of the soul as evolutionary paths in spacetime.



https://youtu.be/3xx7sgNVE-A [Embed]

Lengths would infer area. Should be I II I. though this is some wild Number Theory shit, as sqrt2 would be II (implied 2).

>>15364566 (OP)

>define triangle as something specific

>make something that doesn't fall in those definitions

No, a line is not a triangle, 0 degrees isn't an angle, it's a lack of one

Why would length infer area when the width is zero?

>Unable to infer any information.

You have no way of measuring the area of the triangle in OPs image as its not labled for NPC programming.

>But I can just take these numbers and infer it!

EXACTLY. Potåto, potäto.

These are not shapes, they are random atoms in random arrangements.



Nothing more.

itt: degeneracy

>length infer area

Measure the Lengths of the sides, its literally 1:1. I+II+I=Area.

>Area 0

A triangle is three 1D lines. The area is already infered.



POST MATH.

>POST MATH

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Degeneracy_(mathematics)

>HAHAHA 4CHAN WORDS

Fucking rekt me, mate...

Oh...and the "chair" is my face. Now we're both winners.



Happy now?

I think what OP meant to say is that a line segment is a triangle, not a line, but I'm not one of those assholes who will say, "Since the words OP used left some minor point of nuance for me to nitpick, I'm going to pretend like I can't see what he was getting at there and then I will call him a crackpot schizo, tell him to go back to kindergarten, and to study some stupid well known undergraduate text, and then throw the whole thing in the garbage without considering whether OP had an interesting point to raise."



If OP want to say a line is a triangle, I can buy that. Now what?

And Number Theory does all kinds of redefinitions like this all the time. This would be Subdimensional Geometry. Just as "non-sensical" as Hypersimensional Geometry if Physics, but Math has no qualms about physical constraints, so another conceptual translation is needed.



"Dimensional curled up so small..."

Idk...I think theyre equally present in lesser magnitudes so as to require greater precision and finess to "measure".

>absolutely degenerate

>>15364566 (OP)

>not convex



Not a polygon and so not a triangle.

Subdimensional. Update your definitions to reality....reality will not conform to your "belief system of arbitrary definitions".



>Man is me.

>You are not me.

>Therefore you are not a man.

Irrfutable.

>>15364566 (OP)

>you've got a line, which is also a triangle

It's not, because it wouldn't satisfy the very requirement of being a triangle: the sum of two sides must be greater than the third side.

Lengths are denoted.



Mathematical 2-D plane triangles dont exist in reality. Neither does a 1-D triangle. This is all logically arbitrary definitions.

Namefags truly are a cancer
