Skip to main content
26 events
when toggle format what by license comment
S Jul 1 at 4:43 history suggested Đào Thanh Oai CC BY-SA 4.0
Show that Ptolemy theorem is special case of Feuerbach-Luchterhand
Jul 1 at 1:33 review Suggested edits
S Jul 1 at 4:43
Mar 23, 2016 at 5:05 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 1 character in body
Mar 21, 2016 at 14:06 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 9 characters in body
Mar 21, 2016 at 12:52 vote accept Oai Thanh Đào
Mar 21, 2016 at 9:18 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Dear Mister @katz The case n=2 it is Feuerbach-Luchterhand ; the case n=3 it is tube.geogebra.org/m/1443865 ; the case n=4 it is geogebra.org/m/1443867 . and I checked the conjectures true with n=3,4,5,6. So I think it is true with any n>1.
Mar 21, 2016 at 9:18 answer added Fedor Petrov timeline score: 5
Mar 21, 2016 at 9:11 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Dear Mister @katz
Mar 21, 2016 at 9:04 comment added Mikhail Katz @OaiThanhĐào could you try to clarify what you mean when you write that your symbolic manipulation program verified the correctness of this? Can your package handle an arbitrary parameter $n$ or do you mean to say that the package checked it for some low values of $n$?
Mar 21, 2016 at 9:01 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
added 112 characters in body
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:57 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Yes. But I think these conjectures at here are difficulte than in there math.stackexchange.com
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:56 comment added Oai Thanh Đào @TobiasKildetoft I edited my question. I thank to You
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:55 comment added Tobias Kildetoft Those do not actually seem to contain the conjectures mentioned here.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:53 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Dear Mister @TobiasKildetoft I posed some my conjecture in math.stackexchange.com but I didn't get a solution. Example: math.stackexchange.com/questions/1441934/… And math.stackexchange.com/questions/1441953/… So I posted the question this here. Because I think it is difficult to proof more than two equestion in math.stackexchange.com above
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:50 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Please see: @TobiasKildetoft tube.geogebra.org/material/show/id/1443865 and geogebra.org/m/1443867
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:48 comment added Tobias Kildetoft @katz Unless Geogebra is a lot more advanced than I was given to think, I doubt it has formally verified a statement about an arbitrary number of points.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:45 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
added 157 characters in body; edited title
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:43 comment added Mikhail Katz @TobiasKildetoft, the OP seems to be saying that her software package formally verified the identity, so that it can be said to be true, but perhaps the OP does not have a "clean" proof.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:42 comment added Tobias Kildetoft If you don't have a proof then you don't know that it is true. I must say I don't think this is on an appropriate level for MO. Maybe math.stackexchange.com would be a better place. But please actually formulate the full question, rather than just state the conjectured generalizations.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:40 comment added Oai Thanh Đào Yes, I check my generalizations by geogebra sofware. It is true, but I don't have a proof. I need a proof.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:38 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
added 58 characters in body
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:37 comment added Tobias Kildetoft You mean you are asking whether these are correct?
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:35 comment added Oai Thanh Đào I thank to You. @TobiasKildetoft I want to have a solution for the two generalizations.
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:31 comment added Tobias Kildetoft And what is your question?
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:25 history edited Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0
added 519 characters in body
Mar 21, 2016 at 8:17 history asked Oai Thanh Đào CC BY-SA 3.0