Talk:Pythagorean theorem

message: I don't have time now, tho maybe i'll do this myself later. 
(1) All figures should be numbered, and referred to by number in the text, not just in  this section but over the entire article. A good way would be to number sections and do Figure 1-1, 1-2, 2-1, etc. so renumbering does not have to occur as much when edits are done. 
(2) There is a two-panel diagram here with an upper and a lower panel. But the text talks about the lower panel first, then the upper, which is confusing. The diagram should be cut in half and made into two, rearranged in the logical order. editeur24 (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: The problem with numbering the figures in semi-popular Wikipedia articles is that the numbering very rarely stays up to date as many Wikipedians make slight changes here and there. It takes someone constantly checking to maintain the numbering. Per the manual of style, sections "[should] not be numbered or lettered as an outline". –jacobolus (t) 19:46, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Algebraic Proofs: edit request to number and  rearrange the diagram 

message: This video by polymathematic demonstrates a trigonometric proof of the Pythagorean theorem recently discovered by Calcea Johnson and Ne'Kiya Jackson, two high school students at St. Mary's Academy in New Orleans, who recently presented it at the (2023?) Spring Southeastern Sectional Meeting of the American Mathematical Society. They used a pure (mostly) trigonometric proof, using what they call a "waffle cone" geometric construction to arrive at the equation a2 + b2 = 2ab / sin (2a) = c2. It would be nice to add this to the article, in the "Trigonometric Proofs" section. (I'm not sure how to present this proof myself.) — Loadmaster (talk) 22:57, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See multiple long discussions above, starting at  —David Eppstein (talk) 07:16, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  New trigonometric proof 

message: The redirect Pythagoras' theorem proof (rational trigonometry) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 06:59, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Pythagoras' theorem proof (rational trigonometry)]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Please, move the first formula on the page to go right after the first paragraph (if you view the page on a mobile device now, you will not see the formula where it should be). Germanivanov0719 (talk) 18:11, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand the request. Can you elaborate? –jacobolus (t) 18:25, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand either. When I view the article on a mobile device (using the Android app on my phone) I do see the formula where it should be, immediately below the first paragraph and above the (minimized) infobox. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know how to minimize the infobox, and I'm using the default theme. Could you try using the DevTools to decrease the view width to see if that breaks it (you need to reload the page after you change the view)? I've tested it on my Android phone and on macOS, both with Chrome, and I have the same problem. Germanivanov0719 (talk) 18:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

text: Try opening the page on a phone. The first paragraph end with "...often called the Pythagorean equation:", and instead of the the equation you will see this box with information about the theorem. The formula will be below that box. Germanivanov0719 (talk) 18:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This seems like a Mediawiki problem. The infobox is at the top of the page in the source, and the equation immediately follows the paragraph. I think Mediawiki's mobile view perhaps special-cases the leading image or infobox to move it after the first paragraph? Not sure if there's a good workaround to force the equation to stay with the paragraph. We could perhaps try adding a paragraph break earlier so that the sentence stays with the equation. –jacobolus (t) 18:42, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I tried making such a change. We can discuss whether it's worth it to make article content compromises for this, or if there's some other work around, and possibly revert that change. Does that at least fix the problem? –jacobolus (t) 18:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, now the formula is after the paragraph, which is after the infobox. Germanivanov0719 (talk) 18:55, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2023 

message: Looking at the hypotenuse and height of the three similar triangles, we can write the following products and ratios relationships, then multiply them:
a·a' +  b·b'  =  c·c'    (products = 2 x areas)
a/a' =  b/b'  =  c/c'    (ratios)
Dividing them naturally also gives us:  a'2 + b'2 = c'2 
[note to self: add reliable sources here]
Weallwiki (talk) 16:20, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This page doesn't need more proofs, unless they are (a) published in reliable sources, and (b) in some way particularly notable or interesting, as described in reliable sources. We already have more than enough proofs to make the general point that the possible list of proofs is endless. With that said though, this is a fine proof. Nice work. If you can find some website that attempts to comprehensively list as many proofs as possible, you could submit this there. (Unfortunately Alexander Bogomolny died a few years ago, so I don't think cut-the-knot.org/pythagoras/ is taking new submissions.) –jacobolus (t) 16:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

text: This is fairly simple, so I like that.  I see that the triangles are similar, but we'd want to explain that.  I do hope you find a reliable source that shows that this is sufficiently notable. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 17:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

text: Thanks for the great feedback so far, will look into making these improvements.  Weallwiki (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simple algebraic proof using similar triangles 

message: There are also some trigometric proofs of the theorem.  These could be mentioned.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Trigonometry is based on Pythagorean theorem. Therefore, a trigonometric proof should be circular. Nevertheless, if you know a trigonometric proof that is not circular and has been reliably published, is could be added. D.Lazard (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Trigonometry is not inherently based on the Pythagorean theorem. Much of it is, but nowhere near the entirety. After all, the field preceded Pythagoras (seked). Dan Wang (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether the seqed is part of trigonometry is a semantic dispute rather than a historical/factual one. The seqed is not relevant to the type of "trigonometry" intended when someone says "trigonometric proof of the Pythagorean theorem". By any definition that includes the seqed as "trigonometry", most of Book I of Euclid's Elements should likewise count as "trigonometry", including the Pythagorean theorem itself. By typical definitions of trigonometry, however, the subject involves some relation between lines and circular arclengths or angle measures, and really starts with Hipparchus; centuries-older approaches from Egypt and Mesopotamia are a kind of "proto-trigonometry" at best. –jacobolus (t) 15:26, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

text: There has been some previous discussion about this topic. See  and . –jacobolus (t) 16:11, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Trigometric proofs