Difference between revisions of "Talk:Shoelace Theorem"
(New page: ==Proof== Perhaps we can use induction? But I do not know how to prove it nicely for a triangle. --~~~~) |
(→Proof) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Proof== | ==Proof== | ||
Perhaps we can use induction? But I do not know how to prove it nicely for a triangle. --[[User:1=2|1=2]] 12:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC) | Perhaps we can use induction? But I do not know how to prove it nicely for a triangle. --[[User:1=2|1=2]] 12:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I think that it has to do with the determinant of something; the form for a triangle is very similar to the determinant of a matrix. Volume 2 has a proof, if someone wants to copy it. [[User:ThinkFlow|ThinkFlow]] 20:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Can we have a froof that doesn't use calculus? [[User:Greenpepper9999|Greenpepper9999]] ([[User talk:Greenpepper9999|talk]]) 19:10, 30 May 2015 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 19:10, 30 May 2015
Proof
Perhaps we can use induction? But I do not know how to prove it nicely for a triangle. --1=2 12:50, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
I think that it has to do with the determinant of something; the form for a triangle is very similar to the determinant of a matrix. Volume 2 has a proof, if someone wants to copy it. ThinkFlow 20:32, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
Can we have a froof that doesn't use calculus? Greenpepper9999 (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2015 (EDT)
