This is aproximate method, since those two arcs (initial one and arc of 180 degrees) are NOT congruent. You are not supposed to prove solution by using marked protractor. Simple solution for trisecting of 90 degrees angle is already well known and you don't need to draw aditional 180 degrees angle/arc. Just use the same radius AE, mark 60 degrees from point E, then repeat the same from point D. Also, try your "method" for randomly chosen angle, i.e. 64 degrees and 2 minutes and prove that 3 parts are really equal using only compass. Thanks for reading.
Judging by how factorial-numbers often have a consistent ratio of prime-factors between the powers of 2, 3, and 5, I consider Trisection to be: •Twice as important as dividing an angle by 5... But also: •Half as important as Bisecting an entire circle. So 720 (being the 6th factorial-number, 6!) is my favorite number to use when subdividing a circle by multiple parts/pieces, and guess what: This is *almost* the official way to subdivide a circle, only that a Circle is actually normally divided by 360 degrees, which is exactly half the number 720... Very close-enough to satisfy my preference upon how I would prefer to split a circle by! 🙂
One of the classical problems of Greek mathematics along with squaring the circle and duplication of the cube. None of these problems have been solved using only a straight edge and compass. When we want to trisect and angle it means all angles and not just 90 degrees.
@@SHSIRCLASSES it is proofed that 60° cant be trisected, the method u showed was a part of proof paper (1979) that trisected 60° but aproxxly and error cant be determined by naked eye
Please correct the title and description of the video. It works only for 90 degree, however it is a rather complicated way to obtain 30 degree. Anyway, your title suggest that you provide a method which works for every angles. But this is not the case. You mislead many people who try to apply your method. Anyway, the trisection of angles is an old classical problem, with many surprising results and connections with different branches of maths, see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_trisection (the hungarian version is more compact: hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sz%C3%B6gharmadol%C3%A1s ) Please correct the title and description of your video!
Hi everyone welcome to shsirclasses.
Please subscribe channel.
This is aproximate method, since those two arcs (initial one and arc of 180 degrees) are NOT congruent. You are not supposed to prove solution by using marked protractor. Simple solution for trisecting of 90 degrees angle is already well known and you don't need to draw aditional 180 degrees angle/arc. Just use the same radius AE, mark 60 degrees from point E, then repeat the same from point D. Also, try your "method" for randomly chosen angle, i.e. 64 degrees and 2 minutes and prove that 3 parts are really equal using only compass. Thanks for reading.
Try drawing 20⁰ by trisecting that 60⁰. You can't trisect every angle with only straight edge and compass.
yes. your are right. but we can trisect 30°,60°,90°, . . .
Field theory me iska prove hai......
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
@@Bemine4funno, it cannot
In this, the perfect angle is given only 90 degrees, how will you divide an unknown angle into three parts?
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
There is no known method of trisecting any angle
I tried this technique with 60° and it worked🎉, i think we have to try and verify this technique with known angles. 😊
@@kamrulhasan1493 No it doesn't work it only works with 90
there is no general method to to this
Nice your voice sir
Thanks a lot.
Welcome sir
"angle trisection" was proved to be impossible in 1837 by Pierre Wantzel.
Judging by how factorial-numbers often have a consistent ratio of prime-factors between the powers of 2, 3, and 5, I consider Trisection to be:
•Twice as important as dividing an angle by 5... But also:
•Half as important as Bisecting an entire circle.
So 720 (being the 6th factorial-number, 6!) is my favorite number to use when subdividing a circle by multiple parts/pieces, and guess what: This is *almost* the official way to subdivide a circle, only that a Circle is actually normally divided by 360 degrees, which is exactly half the number 720... Very close-enough to satisfy my preference upon how I would prefer to split a circle by! 🙂
Perfecto👏💯😊
This is possible only for 60 & 90 degrees
for 60 it is not possible
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
@@Bemine4fun No, it cannot.
One of the classical problems of Greek mathematics along with squaring the circle and duplication of the cube. None of these problems have been solved using only a straight edge and compass. When we want to trisect and angle it means all angles and not just 90 degrees.
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
La tecnica funziona con ogni angolo
@@Bemine4fun No, it cannot.
Thanks
You have to prove your drawing is really correct by geometry otherwise it is a joke.
This is WRONG! Imean only this s right . U cant divied others angles like this. It is proven that u cant trisect angles with compass
yes. But we can trisect angles of multiple 3.
U can do it
@@SHSIRCLASSES OK, then show us how can 60 degrees be trisected in 3 equal parts and provide the proof.
Thank 😀❤️
Perfect, I love this
Where are you from?
Thanks for you sir
Thanks bro
This is incorrect.
Very confusing. Not clear.
re-copy it on paper it realy helps an then you will understand (im 12 btw so im shure with your expirience u can understand too :) )
experience*
Wrong method.
why ?
@@SHSIRCLASSES prove the method.
Trisection of an angel is impossible.
Trisect of every angle is impossible. But we can divide 60° by 3. ok.
@@SHSIRCLASSES it is proofed that 60° cant be trisected, the method u showed was a part of proof paper (1979) that trisected 60° but aproxxly and error cant be determined by naked eye
Please correct the title and description of the video.
It works only for 90 degree, however it is a rather complicated way to obtain 30 degree.
Anyway, your title suggest that you provide a method which works for every angles. But this is not the case.
You mislead many people who try to apply your method.
Anyway, the trisection of angles is an old classical problem, with many surprising results and connections with different branches of maths, see e.g. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angle_trisection (the hungarian version is more compact: hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sz%C3%B6gharmadol%C3%A1s )
Please correct the title and description of your video!
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
@@Bemine4funNot true for any ARBITRARY angle. On certain angles.
@@Bemine4fun Please, understand that it is not method, it is incorrect and you cannot prove by repeating the same silly sentence again, and again. .
In this, the perfect angle is given only 90 degrees, how will you divide an unknown angle into three parts?
Actually, that is the main problem. Trisection is only proven with good angle and also been proven about the impossibility for randomized angle.
This technique can be used for any unknown angle.
@@Bemine4fun Show the proof.
Thanks