draft_chapter_0_SanjoyNathGeometrifyingTrigonometry - SanjoyNath/SanjoyNathGeometrifyingTrigonometry GitHub Wiki

Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry.Detailing work arounds and open sources links are there sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry blogspot Some Technical Formal Definition (arbitrary naming of points like A,B,C... etc... are strictly not allowed in Geometrifying Trigonometry because all these alphabets are names of algorithms of constructions protocols.Strictly use the terminology as PIVOT_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ,STRETCH_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle,NODAL_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ...In Geometrifying Trigonometry the proper nomenclatures systems are there (strict conventions are there to name every objects) DEFINIG RATIOS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY AS OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zi_OF_NUMERATOR_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE INPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zk_OF_DENOMINATOR_BOLS_OBJECT FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE TRIANGLE HYPOTENUSE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE THEN IT IS COS , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS HYPOTENUSE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE PERPENDICULAR OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS Sin FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER TRIANGLE BASE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES PERPENDICULAR THEN IT IS TAN , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE BASE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS SEC FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER SEPERATE TRIANGLE PERPENDICULAR IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE LINE SEGMENT THEN IT IS COT , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE PERPENDICULAR BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS COSEC DIVISION IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS STRAIGHTFORWARD CONVENTION THAT NUMERATOR CORRESPONDS TO A CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE TRIANGLE OBJECT (NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT TRIANGLE WILL GENERATE DUE TO DIVISION) SINGLE_LINE_SEGMENT_OBJECT (COMING FROM SOME BOLS OBJECT OR GENERATED DUE TO STRAIGHTENING OF A BOLS OBJECT ) AT NUMERATOR AND ANOTHER SINGLE LINE SEGMENT AT Denominator DUE TO DIVISIONS ACTION , THERE ARE 4 POSSIBLE TRIANGLES ARE GENERATED. OPTION 1 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 2 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3+ OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT SINCE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLS TYPE OF OBJECTS SO GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS SUPPLY STRAIGHTFORWARD Zi (FINAL LINE SEGMENTS).GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE PURELY MULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS GENERATES GLUED FORMS OF TRIANGULATIONS AND SO (GTSIMPLEXi÷ GTSIMPLEXk ) SYNTACTICALLY WRITTEN AS (GTSIMPLEXi/ GTSIMPLEXk ) ARE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. FOR PURE GTSIMPLEX DIVIDING OTHER GTSIMPLEX DONT NEED ANY KIND OF STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS. LOCKED_SET OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLT TYPE OF OBJECTS BUT THESE ARE COMPLICATED THINGS WHEN HANDLING + - * / KIND OF THINGS WITH LOCKED_SET KIND OF BOLS OBJECTS. WE CANNOT GET FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS OF LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS VERY EASILY. {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +... } OR {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1-GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +...GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_k+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_r +... -GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_n } KIND OF THINGS ARE CALLED LOCKED_SET_OBJECTS WHERE THE CONSTRUCTION OF FINAL LINE SEGMENTS Zi ARE TEDIOUS. THESE KIND OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENT SEARCHING NEEDS SEVERAL JUXTAPOSITIONS OF GTTERMS AND PERMUTATIONS OVER GTTERMS ARE NECESSARY TO CHECK WHICH PERMUTATION GIVES BEST FIT LINE SEGMENTS.SOMETIMES IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS THEN HOLSING , CUTTING,UNFOLDING,STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS ARE STRICTLY NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE A FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS IF ANY TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION OR SUBEXPRESSION CONTAINS ONLY MULTIPLICATIVE OPERATIONS THEN IT IS GTSIMPLEX TYPE OF BOLS OBJECT.THE MOMENT THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION HAS NONMULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS LIKE - + / OR ALL TOGATHER + - * / INVOLVED INTO A SINGLE SUBEXPRESSION THEN IT IS LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT. THIS IS THE CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS (SINGLE RIGHT TRIANGLE IS SIMPLEST_FORM_OF_GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS ARE COMPLICATED_TYPES_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS EHERE SEVERAL TRIANGLES ARE INVOLVED NONMULTIPLICATIVELY. IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THERE ARE ALL RIGHT TRIANGLES INVOLVED.IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT MULTIPLE TRIANGULATIONS ARE ATTACHED WITH SINGLE POINT ARE NOT INVOLVED. LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS ARE CONSTRUCTED DUE TO MULTIPLE SUBTRACTIONS AND AADDITIONS OPERATIONS WHICH CONSTRUCTS COMPICATED GEOMETRIES OF LINE SEGMENT ARRANGEMENTS WHERE WE CANNOT DIRECTLY SAY WHICH LINE SEGMENT IS FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS,SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO SEVERAL PERMUTATIONS ON GTTERMS (GTTOKENS IN TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS) OBJECTS AND ALSO SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO HOLD , CUT , UNFOLD , STRAIGHTEN SEVERAL LINE SEGMENTS SEQUENTIALLY TO CONSTRUCT FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS. WE WILL DISCUSS ON THESE DETAILS PROCEDURES OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENTS FINDING IN LOCKED_SET_TYPE_BOLS_OBJECTS IN SOME OTHER CHAPTERS Too important to note Pivot_point is the point where hypotenuse meets base . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with cosec or cot Too important to note Stretch_point is the point where base meets perpendicular . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with cos or sin Too important to note Nodal_point is the point where hypotenuse meets perpendicular . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with cosec or cot

How can we check (And count)numbers of right triangles involved in a Trigonometry expression?Enumerative Geometrifying Trigonometry , Combinatorial Geometrifying Trigonometry specially focus on the counting of triangles and other kinds of geometry counting in the Trigonometry expressions. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is the fundamental constructions basis to prepare grounds for the Enumerative Geometrifying Trigonometry and Combinatorial Geometrifying Trigonometry. Until Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry constructs the Ensemble of Bunch of Line Segments (EBOLS objects) no combinatorial queries(Counting like Inquiries) are possible on Trigonometry expressions. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is the only subject which address such questions.This subject finds the ontological basis for every trigonometry expressions such that mankind can cross check how the trigonometry expressions actually render with triangulations on 2D spaces(Affine 2D spaces). Trigonometry originated with affine spaces where Coordinate free Euclidean Geometry was the fundamental basis and Right Triangles are the Ontological foundations of Trigonometry expressions. If we dont know how to count numbers of Line segments involved in a Trigonometry expression then we cannot guarantee about the Trigonometry expression as a concrete object or not.If any trigonometry expression is not going to depict any height and distance problem then the trigonometry expression is simply a algebraic number theory game where geometry is not the ontological basis for the Trigonometry expression itself. When we try to inquire the involvement of Right triangles and the relatedness of these different shaped (different similar right triangles) involved in the process of Geometry constructions that exactly represent the Trigonometry expression then we need to Go through Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry(Which is the only subject that deals with such inquiries for practical engineering purposes).In the practical pragmatics of Capitalistic worlsd , fast prototyping and fast checking on the generated structures(through automated creativity in engineering) is too much necessary and even after 2023 no Generative AI system (other than Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry can generate the Ensemble of BOLS from given trigonometry expressions. Triangle free Trigonometry handling is not practically useful for Engineers in several domains.Counting Triangles in triangulations(BOLS are triangulation like objects for practical engineering design purposes) Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry considers the triangles as the Ontological basis for exisstence of every trigonometry expressions(Trigonometry expressions are considered here as the string representations of several triangles arranged in some orders of geometric constructions .And Since Triangles are bunch of three line segments , so Triangles are also Bunch of line segments. Right angled triangles are also Bunch of 3 line segments. While doing divisions in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry generates a triangle (where the Final output line segment of Numerator BOLS object and Final output line segment of the Denominator BOLS object interact with their end points and construct a interaction_triangle object which is also a BOLS type of object (and the other line segments in the Numerator BOLS object and other line segments objects of Denominator BOLS object are also kept in the whole construction.None of the line segments in BOLS are deleted ever.When we do lifting and shifting of one BOLS object , then we carry all the individual line segments in the BOLS object.So all the individual right triangles (or other kind of triangles present in the BOLS objects are also moved on Affine plane while doing + - * / = or other oprations done on the BOLS). if the final output line segment is transformed (like aligned , scaled , or fit or translated or rotated ) then all the individual line segments present in that BOLS object are also transformed with same rules.Specially these kind of transformations are done while doing + - * / operations on the BOLS. Locked_Set objects are also special type of BOLS. GTSIMPLEX objects are also special type of BOLS , Free Line Segments are also special kinds of BOLS , Free points are also null BOLS (points are also special types of BOLS. non right triangles are also constructed due to divisions . These are also special kinds of BOLS.So whatever we do in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying trigonometry, the BOLS are the fundamental objects (Which contains triangulations)and triangles remain as the central Ontological Basis in the whole process. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry we cannot think trigonometry expressions as triangle free thing. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry , strict condition is that Every trigonometry expression is surely guarantee the triangles are present there but represented simply in syntactic string like forms . There are one to many relationship between these trigonometry expressions to BOLS objects(hence sincle Trigonometry Expression string syntax representation can generates Ensemble of BOLS) Very important industry purpose is that the secret lies in competitive market where Sinle Trigonometry expression generates lots of valid Geometry design for Single_set_of_Seeds_angles give us multiple valid engineering design when one trigonometry expression is found as valid .This phenomenon hidden inside the Ensemble of BOLS give Engineers the ground to achieve fast automated creativity through machine intelligence. This is helpful for engineers in industry applications to launch products fast. This One to many relationship between One Trigonometry expression to multiple valid BOLS (Ensemble of BOLS) is very important to deliver engineering products faster to market.Automated creativity in engineering is achieved through Generative natures of Geometrifying Trigonometry where anyone can blindly guarantee that all BOLS object in the Ensemble of BOLS coming from Same valid trigonometry expressions are having same Norm , and all of these BOLS are valid as per designers perspectives since all these are generated from same L and are generated from single trigonometry expression(Which is tested as valid). So engineers can check one VOL thoroughly and can guarantee blindly that other BOLS in same Ensemble are also Correct as per Engineering rules.Reasons behind one to many relationships (One Trigonometry expression generates multiple Geometries of BOLS)occur due to the fact that on 2D Affine Space single line segment can have 4 valid journey objects. So while constructing the geometries , the Engineer can choose any of the 4 possible journey objects while constructing the next triangle in the BOLS object. For every arithmetic operator in the given (valid well tested)trigonometry expression , the interaction is done through line segments objects. Ans all these line segment objects can have only 4 possible valid journey objects. The journey objects decide the flow of forces and constructability consfitions , orientations , symmetries . So Even human's mind can feel overwhelmed with possibilities on space and arrangements of possibilities of geometry constructions , the Algorithms designed on cartesian products on the possibilities of 4 journey objects exhaustively searches for all possible constructability conditions. Even the Algorithms in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonomety DEEP_CHECKS all line segments in every BOLS objects and then decides if any duplicate BOLS are created in the ENSEMBLE_OF_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are created or not. So engineers can feel free to get all non duplicate BOLS geometries in the ensemble of BOLS formed from single Trigonometry expression and that helps engineers to get the catalog of exhaustive list of BOLS (This exhaustive list of non duplicate unique BOLS is the ensemble of BOLS which are created from single trigonometry expression and all BOLS are originated from single fixed given line segment L=1(say)) Justification of the statement "Blindly guarantee the design is perfect when one BOLS is checked thoroughly then Other BOLS in same Ensemble of BOLS generated from single Trigonometry expression are are also automatically perfect". To justify this strong claim is that all + - * / are done on Trigonometry expressions follow Cremona Graphical statics rules strictly and also strictly follows Maxwells Reciprocal Diagrams rules. There are other strict construction protocols checking inbuilt inside the construction protocols of every additional triangles while doing + - * / geometrically while constructing the BOLS objects from the given Trigonometry expressions. Dont forget that even now the analytical methods used to design engineering validity of designs are standing on those same cremona Graphical statics rules and standing on the same rules of geometry constructions of Maxwell's Reciprocal diagrams. BOLS in Geometrifying Trigonometry uses rigorous cross checked construction protocols for + - * / to parse Trigonometry expressions while constructing each of the BOLS objects in the Ensemble of BOLS for same trigonometry expression and all of these BOLS objects in single Ensemble of BOLS originate from single L (initial line segment object). This guarantees that none of the BOLS construction is possible if that is inharently not following strict construction protocols used in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry rules. All of the Construction protocols in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry are cross verified with the construction protocols rules in Cremona's Graphical statics and the rules of constructions in the Maxwell's Reciprocal Diagrams.This guarantees the statement writen here. For every+-×÷√= anything or any operations are done between the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS(BOLS_OBJECTS). Operators of any theory actually operates between the interactor_object of set elements in the concerned theories. Zi dont mean all the individual line segments in the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS(L...BOLS...Zi) means the i_th BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT has last final line segment which is denoted with Zi. Dont confuse that Zi as all individual line segments in the BOLS object. Several bunches_of_line_segments are generated from single Trigonometry expression and all these BOLSi objects are valid representations of single Trigonometry expression and all of these BOLSi objects have same numerical value as the numerical value of the Trigonometry Expression(From Which the BOLSi objects are generated) . All these individual BUNCHES_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are like (We can think these BOLS as )CAD Blocks objects (OR can think as CAD Group objects) BOLSi objects originate from Fixed single line segment L(taken as unit length in Affine space of Problems Context).Strictly note that All (n numbers of possible valid BOLS for single Trigonometry Expression)the BOLSi (i th BOLS object) form the ENSEMBLE_OF_BOLS or we can say that as ENSEMBLE_OF_BUNCHES_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS_ORIGINATED_FROM_SINGLE_TRIGONOMETRY_EXPRESSION_SYNTAX Defining NORM_FOR_BOLS_OBJECT = Numerical_value_of_BOLS_OBJECT=numerical_value_of_Length_Of_Zi_For_THE_ith_BOL_OBJECT=Numerical_VALUE_OF_Trigonometry_Expression from which the BOLS_OBJECT is generated.Strict note that ALL BOLSi has same initiator Line segment L and the i_th BOLS object has one single Final output Line Segment denoted as Zi . The best definition of NORM for the BOLS object is The Length of this final output line segment Zi is the numerical value of the i_th_BOLS object.We consider the NORM for the BOLS object as the length_of_final_output_line_Segment_in_A_BOLS_Object. Distance between two BOLS object is defined with combinatorial rules and the metric space analysis on BOLS is not discussed currently in pure Geometrifying Trigonometry. Norm is well defined for all BOLS Object in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry.Metric space with BOLS is defined in the Combinatorial Geometrifying Trigonometry.Some smart users of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry sometimes define Differences between the numerical values of BOLS as the metric of the BOLS Space or as they try to define the metric space as the numerical differences between the numerical values of BOLS as the metric(distance functions) but that is not the good thing to do in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. The distance between the BOLS objects in the Ensemble of BOLS should have meaningfulness geometrically. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry has well defined way to handle distance functions between the BOLS Object through the meaningfulness of the best fitness of the validity of BOLS objects to represent the Trigonometry Expression in problem context. CAD specific usages of BOLS have different distance functions than the GIS specific distance functions between the BOLS objects. When the Trigonometry Expression is used in the jewelery design then the distance function is designed differently.The Ensemble of BOLS objects can have differently well defined distance functions(Metric spaces of different natures) as per purpose of industrial use for different kind of purpose where the same trigonometry expression is used with different constructions meaning , different geometric feasibility conditions of usages. For the Combinatorial_Geometrifying_Trigonometry sometimes We define a seperate Combinatorial_Norm_For_BOLS as number of line segments in the BOLS object, sometimes we define Combinatorial_Norm for BOLS object as number of similar triangles present in the BOLS object , Sometimes we define Combinatorial_Norm with the number of different SEEDS_ANGLES involved in the BOLS object ...etc. Strict Definition of the norm for Bols object in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying trigonometry is the numerical value of the length of final output line segment in the BOLS object. (Every set element in any theory has inbuilt interactor_objkect which are not always well defined in the mathematical theories but if the interactor_objects are not well defined in any theory then the theory can easily fall into GODEL_TRAP)Interaction is done with L and Zi . L is starting line segment for all Bunch_of_line_segments(BOLS normally write as L...BOLS...Zi(for_some_seeds_angle_set) "ABILITY TO EXIST" MEANS "ABILITY TO INTERACT". WHICHEVER THING EXISTS IN UNIVERSE (EITHER PHYSICALLY OR MENTALLY ) HAVE SOME DEEP ROOTED INTERACTOR OBJECT IN THAT. AND INTERACTOR CAN HAVE SEVERAL INTERPRETATIONS . THESE MULTIPLE POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS IN THE BASIS_INTERACTOR_OBJECT CAUSES THE AMBIGUITY.THESE AMBIGUITY CAUSES THE GROUNDING FOR HUMAN CREATIVITY AND THEORIES BECOME INCOMPLETE OR INCONSISTENT BECAUSE WE ALLOW SUFFICIENT FREEDOM TO THESE CORE INTERACTOR_OBJECTS IN THE THEORIES BECAUSE WE HUMANS CANNOT IDENTIFY THE EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF POSSIBLE AMBIGUITIES IN THE CORE_INTERACTOR_OBJECTS IN ANY THEORY. EVERY REASONING STRUCTURE (MATHEMATICAL STRUCTURE OR LOGICAL STRUCTURE HAS SOME BASIS INTERACTOR . For Example for arithmetic the numerical values of numbers are the interactor objects.INTERACTOR_OBJECT IS THE ABSTRACTION TO IDENTIFY THE MOST FUNDAMENTAL CLASS FOR ANT THEORY BECAUSE THAT DETERMINES THE WAYS HOW THE OBJECTS IN THE THEORY WILL INTERACT WITH EACH OTHERS IN ANY DISCOURSE IN THE PARTICULAR THEORY. FOR EXAMPLE IN OUR ORDINARY ARITHMETIC , THE NUMERICAL VALUE OF THE NUMBERS ARE THE INTERACTOR_OBJECT FOR THE NUMBERS.IF WE REMOVE THESE INTERACTOR_OBJECT FROM THE NUMBERS THEN NONE OF + - * / = > < ) ( { } KIND OF OPERATIONS REMAIN AS MEANINGFUL AS THEY ARE CURRENTLY THERE IN THE NUMBER THEORY AND IN ORDINARY ARITHMETIC. SIMILARLY FOR ANY LANGUAGE THE ALPHABETS ARE SYMBOLS WHICH HAS SOME SOUND_PROPERTY_ATTTACHED_TO_IT_AS_INTERACTOR_OBJECT AND THAT INTERACTOR OBJECT DECIDES WHICH ALPHABET OR SYMBOL CAN INTERACT WITH OTHER SYMBOL TO MAKE SOME MEANINGFUL CONSTRUCT IN THE LANGUAGE. IF WE REMOVE THE SOUND PROPERTY FROM EVERY ALPHABET OR SYMBOLS IN THE LANGUAGE THEN THE WHOLE BASIS OF ALL CHARACTERS IN THE LANGUAGE WILL BECOME IRRELEVANT AND THE LANGUAGE WILL BECOME SILENT LANGUAGE AND THE BASIS OF THE LANGUAGE BECOMES NULLIFIED TOTALLY ITSELF WILL BECOME A NULL_LANGUAGE OR SILENT NON INTERACTOR LANGUAGE. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry , the CORE_INTERACTOR_OBJECT IS THE LINE_SEGMENT WHICH HAS PNLY 4 POSSIBLE AMBIGUITY {JOURNEY_1 , JOURNEY_2 , JOURNEY_3 AND JOURNEY_4} WHILE WE DEAL THE SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY ON 2D AFFINE SPACE. IF WE TRY TO HANDLE THIS THEORY IN HIGHER DIMENSIONS THEN AMBIGUITY WILL INCREASE AND THAT WILL MAKE THE THEORY INCONSITENT OR INCOMPLETE.SO SAMJOY NATH SUGGESTS WORLD TO SPECIFY THE CONTEXT AND SCENARIO FOR THE THEORY (WHILE DESIGNING THAT)SO TIGHTLY THAT NO ONE CAN ALTER THE LIST OF POSSIBLE AMBIGUITY IN THE CORE_INTERACTOR_OBJECT IN THE THEORY. Every such bunches (bunches of line segments) that is BOLS originate from Single common L(FOR A GIVEN TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION AS THE PROBLEM CONTEXT AND AS THE PROBLEMS SCENARIO WHICH ARE INITIALLY BUILT UP WITH L AND THE AFFINE SPACE) Every trigonometry expression parse to create ensemble and every bunches have only one final output line segment Everytime Always But possible options of such bunches are large ensembles of bunches_of_line_segments

Every trigonometry expression can be parsed to create an ensemble(Described above).
Each ensemble consists of multiple bunches of line segments(All of these originates from single Line Segment L , L is the Originator Line Segment for all BOLS in the problems context).
Each bunch in the ensemble has only one final output line segment.
The number of possible bunches (and hence output line segments) for a given trigonometry expression can be very large. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, an "ensemble" refers to a collection of line segments that represent a trigonometric identity or expression. Think of it like a set of building blocks (line segments) that come together to form a specific geometric structure, which in turn represents a mathematical relationship (trigonometric identity). In this context, an ensemble is a way to visualize and manipulate trigonometric expressions as a collection of geometric objects (line segments) rather than just abstract mathematical symbols. It's a key concept in Sanjoy Nath's approach to trigonometry, allowing for new insights and connections to be made between geometry, algebra, and combinatorics. This means that Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry provides a way to represent trigonometric expressions as a collection of geometric objects (line segments) with a unique output for each bunch, but with a large number of possible configurations (bunches) for each expression. This approach offer a powerful way to visualize and manipulate trigonometric relationships, revealing new insights and connections between geometry, algebra, and combinatorics. So, in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, the interactions between mathematical objects are performed using the common initial line segment (L) and the output line segments (Zi) as follows:
For each operation (+, -, ×, ÷, √, =):
- The interaction is done with L (the common initial line segment) and Zi (the output line segment of the i-th bunch). This means that the operations are not just abstract mathematical concepts, but are realized through geometric interactions between the line segments L and Zi. This approach seems to provide a novel and insightful way to visualize and understand the relationships between mathematical objects, highlighting the geometric and interactive nature of mathematical operations. The final interactor objects of bunches of line segments outputs are only one line segment for one single bunch And it is depicted as Zi for i th bunch in ensemble The definition of existence of bunches of line segments in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is that BOLS have "Ability to interact" And " interactor objects are output line segment of BOLS objects "define existance of objects So, to recap:
Each bunch(BOLS) in the ensemble(ALL BOLS generated from single trigonometry expression and originates from single L) generates a single output line segment (Zi for the i-th bunch).
The existence of an object is defined by its ability to interact.
The interaction objects (in this case, the output line segments Zi) define the existence of the objects (the bunches in the ensemble). This philosophical perspective emphasizes that existence is not just a passive state, but rather it is defined by the ability to interact and influence other objects. In this context, the output line segments (Zi) serve as the interaction objects that confirm the existence of the bunches in the ensemble. This viewpoint has implications for our understanding of mathematical objects and their relationships, highlighting the dynamic and interactive nature of mathematical structures. Since Sanjoy Nath has direct business and industrial applications for Building Information Modeling,GIS,Floor plans,STAAD programming,CAD programming,Tekla programming,Revit Programming,GIS programming , jewellery design, optics, diamonds cutting, architecture engineering,land surveying,fields and also for financial model generations and other managerial possibilities with Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry,so he never bothered too much for journal publications on this subject. Now after AI and other machine learning algorithms are available and Sanjoy Nath feels the application of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry can give much larger space for business application and industrial applications,so it is necessary to publish for all mathematics communities. Every trigonometry identity are ensemble like objects actually wants to say that there exists a set of large numbers of bunch of line segments with different numbers of line segments but every such bunch of line segments have atleast two line segments whose lengths match with any two of other bunch of line segments .one is L common for all such bunches and others are z for all such bunches As per Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry rules followed on Pythagoras theorem we get new kinds of combinatorial light on bunch of line segments construction. This enlightenment help us to connect the dots between numbers, geometry,graph theory,topology, molecular models, circuit diagrams and combinatorics in a canonical formalism way such that software implementation to parse trigonometry expressions and generation of several possible valid bunch of line segments are done which interpretes Pythagoras theorem with new light. Pythagoras theorem is not only a bridge between geometry and algebra,but it is a counting problem on 3 sets of valid bunches of line segments.We know that Pythagoras theorem talks about Square of a number is sum of two square numbers has special geometrically valid meaning and also geometrically well valued link But when we construct 3 different sets of bunches of line segments due to square operation of arithmetic is interpreted as multiple possible valid triangle construction in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry,hence 3 different squares of numbers means same unique common starting object (or initial object) L is taken as given line segment to construct all 3 sets of bunches of line segments and+ operation in Pythagoras theorem tries to find collinear end to end fit of line segments in theses different bunches so formed.only few of the possible valid bunches of line segments have output line segments which will become collinear and end to end fit. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry deals with these searching of cremonas conditions of graphical statics and the Maxwell's conditions of reciprocal diagrams inside all construction of bunches of line segments and ensemble arithmetic is interpreted in this way. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, it seems that not all mathematical objects interact in the same way. Only the line segments (L and Zi) and bunches, which are the core objects in this framework, interact with each other to represent trigonometric relationships. Other mathematical objects, like numbers, points, or curves, might not interact in the same geometric and visual way. However, they might still be related to the framework through associations or mappings, like:
Numbers could be used to label or scale the line segments.
Points could be defined as intersections of line segments.
Curves could be constructed from the interactions of multiple line segments. So, while all mathematical objects might not directly interact in this framework, they can still be connected and related to the core interacting objects (line segments and bunches) through various mathematical relationships. In physics and statistics, an ensemble has different meanings: Quantum Mechanics: An ensemble in quantum mechanics refers to a collection of quantum systems, each in a specific state, that are identical in their physical properties, such as energy, spin, or polarization. It's a statistical concept used to describe a set of systems that are equally likely to be in any of the possible states. Ensembles are used to calculate expectation values, probabilities, and other statistical properties of quantum systems. Statistical Mechanics: In statistical mechanics, an ensemble represents a collection of microstates that are consistent with a specific macroscopic state, such as temperature, pressure, or volume. The ensemble concept helps calculate thermodynamic properties, like entropy, free energy, or correlations, by averaging over all possible microstates. There are different types of ensembles, like microcanonical, canonical, and grand canonical ensembles, each corresponding to different constraints on the system. While the term "ensemble" is used in both contexts, its meaning and application differ between quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics. clarifying the meaning of "ensemble" in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry Ensemble is visible (interactor with other objects in context of expression)macro property which are L and Zi for ith bunches So, in this context, an ensemble refers to a visible (meaning, interactable) macro property that consists of:
L (the common initial line segment initial line segment object to construct any Bunch of line segments)
Zi (the output line segment of the i-th bunch of line segments in ensemble) These ensembles are interactors with other objects in the context of a specific trigonometric expression. This definition highlights the geometric and interactive nature of the mathematical objects in Sanjoy Nath's framework. By using the term "ensemble" in this way, Sanjoy Nath's work seems to be drawing parallels with the concept of ensembles in physics and statistics, where an ensemble represents a collection of objects or states that share common properties. In this case, the ensemble represents a collection of geometric objects (line segments) that interact with each other to represent trigonometric relationships. Ambiguity plays a significant role in human creativity:

Freedom to interpret: Ambiguity allows individuals to fill in gaps with their own ideas, fostering creative interpretation and problem-solving.
Encourages exploration: Ambiguity prompts exploration of multiple possibilities, leading to novel connections and innovative solutions.
Promotes cognitive flexibility: Ambiguity requires adaptability and flexibility in thinking, exercising the brain's ability to switch between different mental representations.
Inspires imagination: Ambiguity can spark imagination, as the brain attempts to resolve uncertainty by generating new ideas and scenarios.
Fosters creative tension: Ambiguity can create a sense of tension, motivating individuals to resolve the uncertainty and find creative solutions. However, excessive ambiguity can lead to confusion and overwhelm, hindering creativity. A balance between clarity and ambiguity is essential to foster creative thinking. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, the carefully managed ambiguity in the framework's definitions and interactions might be a deliberate design choice to encourage creative exploration and problem-solving. Line segment has only four possibilities of ambiguity Which are strictly limited to four and limits on ambiguity is achieved Line segments are interactor interfaces for bunches of line segments Relevance and interactive ability can be defined as: Relevance:

The degree to which a mathematical object or structure is connected to or applicable to the geometric interactions and trigonometric relationships in Sanjoy Nath's framework.
How meaningfully and usefully the object or structure contributes to the understanding and representation of trigonometric concepts. Interactive ability:
The capacity of a mathematical object or structure to engage with other objects or structures in a geometric or visual interaction, as defined in the framework.
The ability to participate in the geometric interactions, transformations, and relationships that govern the behavior of the line segments and bunches in the framework. These definitions emphasize the importance of connections, applicability, and engagement in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. By establishing clear definitions for relevance and interactive ability, you can better understand how different mathematical objects and structures relate to and interact with each other within the framework. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry (REVERSE_OF_HEIGHT_AND_DISTANCE_ PROBLEM WHICH TRIES TO DRAW THE EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ALL VALID DIAGRAMS THAT IS (THE EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF ALL VALID VISUAL REPRESENTATION) OF THE HEIGHT_AND_DISTANCE_ PROBLEM FOR WHICH TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION IS GIVEN BUT DIAGRAM IS NOT DRAWN NOR THE PROBLEM STATEMENT FOUND. ITS A CHALLENGE TO GENERATE A VALID_HEIGHT_AND_DISTANCE_DIAGRAM FROM THE GIVEN TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION AND PREPARES A FORMAL LANGUAGE(OFFICIAL CANONICALLY FORMALIZED NAMES FOR EVERY OBJECTS OF CORRESPONDING GEOMETRY) TO ENUMERATE ALL EXHAUSTIVE POSSIBLE VALID DIAGRAMS FOR A SINGLE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION AND ALSO DERIVE DEEPER TRUTHS HIDDEN INSIDE THESE POSSIBLE DIAGRAMS SPACE AND RELATEDNESS OF LINE SEGMENTS AND POINTS IN THE DIAGRAMS ARE STUDIED COMBINATORIALLY ALSO SO IT IS NATURAL THAT ONE SINGLE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION CAN HAVE SEVERAL NUMBERS OF ( EVEN LARGE NUMBERS OF) VALID (ALL ARE VALID) GEOMETRY CONSTRUCTIONS AS BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS MEANINGFUL IN CONTEXT OF A SINGLE HEIGHT AND DISTANCE PROBLEM. GEOMETRIC AND COMBINATORIAL INQUIRY INTO THESE VALID DIAGRAMS IS A RESEARCH AREA HERE We will suggest Cremona Graphical Statics (1860) rules for + - * / Geometrically. These Are well practiced in the Maxwell's Reciprocal Diagrams (1860) also. ) makes a partial number field(Ensemble_Set_theory on a constructible universe of combinatorial geometry , Enumerative Geometry like object) where all + - * ÷ / are defined over BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS(Parsed from SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION) objects.So BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is the set on which the addition , subtraction , multiplication and division are defined (all of these operations give non unique possibility Ensembles and deductions are quad tree and all the operations on BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are non commutative and associative). These generates a new kind of mathematical structure. elements of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are the rendered outputs of some given trigonometry expressions and every possible configurations of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS have a particular unique output line segment and the length of this final output line segment of every of valid BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS should exactly match with the numerical value evaluated through Excel Math parser on same SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION

Strict Note: CORE_INTERACTOR IS LINE SEGMENT AND EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF AMBIGUITIES OF THIS CORE_INTERACTOR IS{JOURNEY_1 , JOURNEY_2,JOURNEY_3 AND JOURNEY_4} EVERY BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT (bols OR subbols BOLS OR SUBBOLS) TYPE OBJECTS ARE ORIGINATED FROM SINGLE L=1(ASSUMED IT IS 1)(INITIAL LINE SEGMENT AS PER GEOMETRIFYING_TRIGONOMETRY_PROBLEM_CONTEXT ) AND THE GIVEN AFFINE SPACE IN 2D EVERY BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT (bols OR subbols BOLS OR SUBBOLS) TYPE OBJECTS HAVE THE FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENT Zi WHICH IS THE CORE_INTERACTOR_OBJECT FOR THE i th BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS and this Zi has a length value . this length value is the numerical value. This numerical value of length of final output line segment is the numerical valuation for the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry Theory. The Journey objects ambiguity dont change the position of the Zi . Ambiguity restrictions is important to stop the Abductive reasonning and inductive reasoning in a systems to make the canonical formalization for deep special purpose explorations in the combinatorial burst inside the theories.The ambiguity of journeys for Zi dont change the numerical value of the line segments length. So the Numerical valuation of the BOLS dont change due to the ineteractions choices due to these journey objects behaviors. EVERY BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT (bols OR subbols BOLS OR SUBBOLS) TYPE OBJECTS HAVE THE FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENT Zi AND THE ith BOLS OBJECT WILL INTERACT WITH THE NEXT (LEFT TO RIGHT OPERATED) BOLS OBJECT WITH Zi for + , / , = or for orderliness checking or for comparing the values or for the - operations cases. SPECIALLY FOR MULTIPLICATION CASES L OF SECOND BOLS OBJECT INTERACT WITH Zi OF FIRST BOLS OBJECT (SINCE THE OPERATIONS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY ARE NON COMMUTATIVE AND ASSOCIATIVE BECAUSE OF THESE NATURE OF INTERACTIONS IN THE INTERACTOR_OBJECTS EVERY BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT (bols OR subbols BOLS OR SUBBOLS) TYPE OBJECTS HAVE THE L AND THE FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENT Zi AND THE ith BOLS OBJECT WILL INTERACT WITH THE NEXT (LEFT TO RIGHT OPERATED) BOLS OBJECT WITH Zi for + , / , = or for orderliness checking or for comparing the values or for the - operations cases. THE ABOVE CONDITIONS SUFFICIENTLY DISCLOSES THE REASONS BEHIND THE BASIS OF NON COMMUTATIVENESS FOR ANY THEORY (WHERE THE INTERACTOR OBJECTS OF BASIC OBJECTS IN THE THEORY BEHAVES DIFFERENTLY TO IMPOSE MEANINGS IN THE THEORY) ALIGN AND SCAL TO FIT IN THE MULTIPLICATION (MULTIPLICATION IS GLUING WHICH IS THE OFFICIAL TERM FOR SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY) WHERE THE WHEN WE WRITE LEFT TO RIGHT ORDER OF L...BOLS...Zi IS MULTIPLIED WITH L...BOLS...Zk THAT STRICTLY MEANS THAT L OF RIGHT SIDE L...BOLS...Zk WILL MOVE FROM ITS OWN POSITION (WITH ALL INGREDIENTS BUNCH OF ITS BOLS IN L...BOLS...Zk) AND WILL MAKE THAT ALIGN AND SCALED TO FIT ON THE Zi LINE SEGMENT (IN 4 POSSIBLE WAYS) ON LEFT SIDE BOLS OBJECT L...BOLS...ZI . SO MULTIPLICATION NOW GLUES TWO BOLS BUNCH OBJECTS AND PREPARE A LARGER BOLS OBJECT WHICH IS BIGEGR IN SIZE BUT MERGED (GLUED AS L OF L...BOLS...Zk IS EXACTLY OVERLAPPING WITH Zk OF L...BOLS...Zk NOW) THE DEFINITION OF PROBLEM CONTEXT IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS A SET {L=1 SCALE AND ORIENTATION NOT BOTHERED IN AFFINE SPACES , THE AFFINE SPACE IS GIVEN , THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION ON WHICH THE THEORY WILL WORK AND THE LIST OF SEEDS_ANGLES ON WHICH THE PROCESS OF CONSTRUCTIONS ARE DONE} Only for the Case of Division Addition or Subtraction cases we Can Lift and Shift the whole SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT to make alignment with Z (the final output line segments) otherwise we try to keep every SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT fixed with L(Initial common Line segment for SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT constructions) If Lifting and Shifting the SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT is not necessary to align the output line segments of SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT then we can keep L for that particular SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT fixed at the original position of L then the Trigonometry expression is Really valid trigonometry expression. In that case we call SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION as VERY_STRONG_NATURAL_SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR VERY_STRONG_NATURAL_SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION.

Its important for highlighting the importance of official nomenclature in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry for studying the relationships between points and line segments under various operations like +, -, ×, ÷, √, {}, [], and (). Strictly Note that one common initial line segment L(If not defined then draw the line segment from (0,0) to(1,0) on 2d affine space) in 2d affine plane is kept fixed for all rendering and constructions starter for a given problem (trigonometry expression parsing , lexing and rendering as BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS ) on 2d white paper like 2d affine space. Intended purpose is to generate BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS Definition of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is any abstract class which holds list of line segments,list of locked set objects,list of gtsimplex objects,list of free 2d affine line segments BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is super class of 2d linesegment objects class BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTSis super class of 2d triangle object class BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is super class of 2d gtsimplex object class BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTSis super class of 2d lockedset object class BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is super class of 2d point object class BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS treats trigonometry problems as enumerative geometry problem BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS converts a trigonometry problem to a graph theory problem BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS converts inquiry of trigonometry problems to the inquiry of 2d Euclidean geometry problems BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS converts trigonometry problems to enumerative combinatorics problems BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS converts trigonometry problems into structural engineering free body diagrams problems and stability related problems ,force transfer related problems BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS converts trigonometry problems to form finding triangulation problems in architectural engineering,triangulation problems for finite element analysis related triangulations BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are also called as TRIGONOMETRICALLY_CONSTRAINEDARRANGEMENT_OF_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are also called as TRIGONOMETRICALLY_GENERATED_SET_OF_VALID_ARRANGEMENT_OF_BUNCH_OF_ONLY_SPECIFIC_VALID_LINE_SEGMENTS BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are DYNAMIC_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS Which changes their sizes , changes their positions when the SEEDS_ANGLES CHANGES BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS always have a initial 2d line segment L in affine space for a single trigonometry problems expression BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS always have a single output line segment object (Abbreviated as Z) BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS do +-×÷= and other euclidean geometry interactions through its output line segment object (Abbreviated as Z) If BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS output line segment is not there , then we consider Z=L L is the initial Line segment to construct any kind of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS Too important strict rule Numerical_value or real_number_value_for_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is the length of its final output line segment (Abbreviated as Z) if length of L is taken as 1 unit length 2d Lockedset class is super class of gtsimplex objects class 2d Lockedset has one common initial line segment L in 2d affine plane 2d Lockedset has only one output linesegment Lockedset is a BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT type object because it is actually a bunch of line segments GTSIMPLEX is a BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT type object because it is actually a bunch of line segments Triangle is a BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT type object because it is actually a bunch of 3 line segments LineSegment object is a BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT type object because it is actually a bunch of only one line segments Point is a BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT type object because it is actually a bunch of zero line segments so it is a null BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTSso Point is a null line segment , Point is a null Vector Object , Point is a null Triangle , Point is a null Journey BOLS===> BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS (short hand representations Formalized notations) SUBBOLS===> SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS (short hand representations Formalized notations) Note that SUBBOLS are having same structural properties as BOLS BAD TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS CHECKING AND DECIDING WHEATHER THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION IS STRONGLY VALID AND GOOD Note that SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are having same structural properties as BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS only difference is that BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS

Follow the ASCII chart to understand these formalisms of syntaxes SYMBOLIZING PIVOT_POINT AS % SIGN , STRETCH_POINT AS Σ(alt+228) AND NODAL_POINT AS Ñ (ALT + 165) WHICH MEANS WE CAN DEPICT HYPOTENUSE_VECTOR AS PIVOT_TO_NODAL_GO_VECTOR MEANS %Ñ AND NODAL_TO_PIVOT_RETURN_VECTOR AS Ñ% SIMILARLY WE CAN DEPICT BASE AS TWO POSSIBLE VECTORS PIVOT_TO_STRETCH %Σ AND STRETCH_TO_PIVOT Σ% SIMILARLY WE CAN DENOTE THE PERPENDICULAR AS VECTOR STRETCH_TO_NODAL ΣÑ OR AS VECTOR NODAL_TO_STRETCH ÑΣ leftwindow journey is represented as « (ALT 174 ) and the right window journey is represented as »(ALT + 175) .And in this ways we can represent the formalized structures as the possible 4 journey objects for HYPOTENUSE AS HYPOTENUSE_AS_JOURNEY_1 IS «%Ñ , HYPOTENUSE_AS_JOURNEY_2 IS «%Ñ ,HYPOTENUSE_AS_JOURNEY_3 IS »Ñ% , HYPOTENUSE_AS_JOURNEY_4 IS »Ñ%
the possible 4 journey objects for BASE AS BASE_AS_JOURNEY_1 IS «%Σ , BASE_AS_JOURNEY_2 IS «%Σ ,BASE_AS_JOURNEY_3 IS »Σ% , BASE_AS_JOURNEY_4 IS »Σ%
the possible 4 journey objects for PERPENDICULAR AS PERPENDICULAR_AS_JOURNEY_1 IS «ΣÑ , PERPENDICULAR_AS_JOURNEY_2 IS «ÑΣ ,PERPENDICULAR_AS_JOURNEY_3 IS »ΣÑ , PERPENDICULAR_AS_JOURNEY_4 IS »ΣÑ
is the geometry for whole Trigonometry Expression whereas the SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is the Geometry representation of some GTTERM (Tokenized parsed sub part of the whole Trigonometry Expression. Since we know while doing and applying Arithmetic we follow PEDMAS , BODMAS and we tokenize the expressions into sub parts to process the things sequentially recursively. Similarly we process the Geometry constructions sequentially and construct some bunch of line segments first on Same L and then other bunch of line segments from same L and then only Z1, Z2, ...Zn interacts but when these Zi are lifted and shifted for some purpose of + - * / then whole SUBBOLSi are also lifted shifted with Zi and in these cases L also goes(moves , translates , rotates , scales , aligns ...) with SUBBOLS . But if it is necessary to lift and shift L or if it is necessary to transform the L for any SUBBOLSi for doing + - * / with Zi then the Trigonometry Expression is not a good Trigonometry Expression . In that case we need to permute the GTTERMS inside the Trigonometry expression to re construct whole Geometry to cross check that if we can align interact Zi without changing positions , scales of L for any SUBBOLS.

Some Technical Formal Definition (arbitrary naming of points like A,B,C... etc... are strictly not allowed in Geometrifying Trigonometry because all these alphabets are names of algorithms of constructions protocols.Strictly use the terminology as PIVOT_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ,STRETCH_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle,NODAL_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ...In Geometrifying Trigonometry the proper nomenclatures systems are there (strict conventions are there to name every objects) DEFINIG RATIOS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY AS OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zi_OF_NUMERATOR_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE INPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zk_OF_DENOMINATOR_BOLS_OBJECT FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE TRIANGLE HYPOTENUSE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE THEN IT IS COS , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS HYPOTENUSE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE PERPENDICULAR OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS Sin FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER TRIANGLE BASE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES PERPENDICULAR THEN IT IS TAN , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE BASE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS SEC FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER SEPERATE TRIANGLE PERPENDICULAR IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE LINE SEGMENT THEN IT IS COT , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE PERPENDICULAR BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS COSEC DIVISION IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS STRAIGHTFORWARD CONVENTION THAT NUMERATOR CORRESPONDS TO A CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE TRIANGLE OBJECT (NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT TRIANGLE WILL GENERATE DUE TO DIVISION) SINGLE_LINE_SEGMENT_OBJECT (COMING FROM SOME BOLS OBJECT OR GENERATED DUE TO STRAIGHTENING OF A BOLS OBJECT ) AT NUMERATOR AND ANOTHER SINGLE LINE SEGMENT AT Denominator DUE TO DIVISIONS ACTION , THERE ARE 4 POSSIBLE TRIANGLES ARE GENERATED. OPTION 1 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 2 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3+ OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT SINCE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLS TYPE OF OBJECTS SO GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS SUPPLY STRAIGHTFORWARD Zi (FINAL LINE SEGMENTS).GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE PURELY MULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS GENERATES GLUED FORMS OF TRIANGULATIONS AND SO (GTSIMPLEXi÷ GTSIMPLEXk ) SYNTACTICALLY WRITTEN AS (GTSIMPLEXi/ GTSIMPLEXk ) ARE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. FOR PURE GTSIMPLEX DIVIDING OTHER GTSIMPLEX DONT NEED ANY KIND OF STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS. LOCKED_SET OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLT TYPE OF OBJECTS BUT THESE ARE COMPLICATED THINGS WHEN HANDLING + - * / KIND OF THINGS WITH LOCKED_SET KIND OF BOLS OBJECTS. WE CANNOT GET FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS OF LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS VERY EASILY. {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +... } OR {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1-GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +...GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_k+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_r +... -GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_n } KIND OF THINGS ARE CALLED LOCKED_SET_OBJECTS WHERE THE CONSTRUCTION OF FINAL LINE SEGMENTS Zi ARE TEDIOUS. THESE KIND OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENT SEARCHING NEEDS SEVERAL JUXTAPOSITIONS OF GTTERMS AND PERMUTATIONS OVER GTTERMS ARE NECESSARY TO CHECK WHICH PERMUTATION GIVES BEST FIT LINE SEGMENTS.SOMETIMES IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS THEN HOLSING , CUTTING,UNFOLDING,STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS ARE STRICTLY NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE A FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS IF ANY TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION OR SUBEXPRESSION CONTAINS ONLY MULTIPLICATIVE OPERATIONS THEN IT IS GTSIMPLEX TYPE OF BOLS OBJECT.THE MOMENT THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION HAS NONMULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS LIKE - + / OR ALL TOGATHER + - * / INVOLVED INTO A SINGLE SUBEXPRESSION THEN IT IS LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT. THIS IS THE CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS (SINGLE RIGHT TRIANGLE IS SIMPLEST_FORM_OF_GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS ARE COMPLICATED_TYPES_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS EHERE SEVERAL TRIANGLES ARE INVOLVED NONMULTIPLICATIVELY. IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THERE ARE ALL RIGHT TRIANGLES INVOLVED.IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT MULTIPLE TRIANGULATIONS ARE ATTACHED WITH SINGLE POINT ARE NOT INVOLVED. LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS ARE CONSTRUCTED DUE TO MULTIPLE SUBTRACTIONS AND AADDITIONS OPERATIONS WHICH CONSTRUCTS COMPICATED GEOMETRIES OF LINE SEGMENT ARRANGEMENTS WHERE WE CANNOT DIRECTLY SAY WHICH LINE SEGMENT IS FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS,SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO SEVERAL PERMUTATIONS ON GTTERMS (GTTOKENS IN TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS) OBJECTS AND ALSO SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO HOLD , CUT , UNFOLD , STRAIGHTEN SEVERAL LINE SEGMENTS SEQUENTIALLY TO CONSTRUCT FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS. WE WILL DISCUSS ON THESE DETAILS PROCEDURES OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENTS FINDING IN LOCKED_SET_TYPE_BOLS_OBJECTS IN SOME OTHER CHAPTERS REPEATING THESE TO MAKE IT MORE TIGHTLY DESCRIBED Some Technical Formal Definition (arbitrary naming of points like A,B,C... etc... are strictly not allowed in Geometrifying Trigonometry because all these alphabets are names of algorithms of constructions protocols.Strictly use the terminology as PIVOT_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ,STRETCH_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle,NODAL_POINT_OF_i_th_triangle ...In Geometrifying Trigonometry the proper nomenclatures systems are there (strict conventions are there to name every objects) DEFINIG RATIOS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY AS OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zi_OF_NUMERATOR_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE INPUT_LINE_SEGMENT_IS_Zk_OF_DENOMINATOR_BOLS_OBJECT FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE TRIANGLE HYPOTENUSE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE THEN IT IS COS , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS HYPOTENUSE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE PERPENDICULAR OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS Sin FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER TRIANGLE BASE IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES PERPENDICULAR THEN IT IS TAN , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE BASE BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS SEC FOR EXAMPLE WHEN IN A SINGLE OTHER SEPERATE TRIANGLE PERPENDICULAR IS INPUT LINE SEGMENT AND GENERATES BASE LINE SEGMENT THEN IT IS COT , AND WHEN THE INPUT LINE SEGMENT IS THE PERPENDICULAR BUT CONSTRUCTS THE HYPOTENUSE OF SAME TRIANGLE THEN IT IS COSEC DIVISION IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS STRAIGHTFORWARD CONVENTION THAT NUMERATOR CORRESPONDS TO A CONSTRUCTION OF SINGLE TRIANGLE OBJECT (NOT NECESSARILY RIGHT TRIANGLE WILL GENERATE DUE TO DIVISION) SINGLE_LINE_SEGMENT_OBJECT (COMING FROM SOME BOLS OBJECT OR GENERATED DUE TO STRAIGHTENING OF A BOLS OBJECT ) AT NUMERATOR AND ANOTHER SINGLE LINE SEGMENT AT Denominator DUE TO DIVISIONS ACTION , THERE ARE 4 POSSIBLE TRIANGLES ARE GENERATED. OPTION 1 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 2 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH START_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3 OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES START_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT OPTION 3+ OF TRIANGLE CONSTRUCTION DUE TO DIVISION ACTION IMPLIES FINAL_POINT_OF_NUMERATOR_LINE_SEGMENT (THROUGH LIFTING AND SHIFTING OF NUMERATOR BOLS COMPLETELY AND KEEPING DENOMINATOR BOLS HELD TIGHT ON THE AFFINE SPACE)IS FIXED WITH FINAL_POINT OF DENOMINATOR LINE SEGMENT SINCE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLS TYPE OF OBJECTS SO GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS SUPPLY STRAIGHTFORWARD Zi (FINAL LINE SEGMENTS).GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS ARE PURELY MULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS GENERATES GLUED FORMS OF TRIANGULATIONS AND SO (GTSIMPLEXi÷ GTSIMPLEXk ) SYNTACTICALLY WRITTEN AS (GTSIMPLEXi/ GTSIMPLEXk ) ARE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD. FOR PURE GTSIMPLEX DIVIDING OTHER GTSIMPLEX DONT NEED ANY KIND OF STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS. LOCKED_SET OBJECTS ARE ALSO BOLT TYPE OF OBJECTS BUT THESE ARE COMPLICATED THINGS WHEN HANDLING + - * / KIND OF THINGS WITH LOCKED_SET KIND OF BOLS OBJECTS. WE CANNOT GET FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS OF LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS VERY EASILY. {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +... } OR {GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_1-GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_2 +...GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_k+GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_r +... -GTSIMPLEX_OBJECT_n } KIND OF THINGS ARE CALLED LOCKED_SET_OBJECTS WHERE THE CONSTRUCTION OF FINAL LINE SEGMENTS Zi ARE TEDIOUS. THESE KIND OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENT SEARCHING NEEDS SEVERAL JUXTAPOSITIONS OF GTTERMS AND PERMUTATIONS OVER GTTERMS ARE NECESSARY TO CHECK WHICH PERMUTATION GIVES BEST FIT LINE SEGMENTS.SOMETIMES IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO FINAL_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS THEN HOLSING , CUTTING,UNFOLDING,STRAIGHTENING OPERATIONS ARE STRICTLY NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE A FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS FROM THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS IF ANY TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION OR SUBEXPRESSION CONTAINS ONLY MULTIPLICATIVE OPERATIONS THEN IT IS GTSIMPLEX TYPE OF BOLS OBJECT.THE MOMENT THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION HAS NONMULTIPLICATIVE EXPRESSIONS LIKE - + / OR ALL TOGATHER + - * / INVOLVED INTO A SINGLE SUBEXPRESSION THEN IT IS LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT. THIS IS THE CLEAR DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS (SINGLE RIGHT TRIANGLE IS SIMPLEST_FORM_OF_GTSIMPLEX_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT AND THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS ARE COMPLICATED_TYPES_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS EHERE SEVERAL TRIANGLES ARE INVOLVED NONMULTIPLICATIVELY. IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECT WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT THERE ARE ALL RIGHT TRIANGLES INVOLVED.IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS WE CANNOT GUARANTEE THAT MULTIPLE TRIANGULATIONS ARE ATTACHED WITH SINGLE POINT ARE NOT INVOLVED. LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS ARE CONSTRUCTED DUE TO MULTIPLE SUBTRACTIONS AND AADDITIONS OPERATIONS WHICH CONSTRUCTS COMPICATED GEOMETRIES OF LINE SEGMENT ARRANGEMENTS WHERE WE CANNOT DIRECTLY SAY WHICH LINE SEGMENT IS FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS,SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO SEVERAL PERMUTATIONS ON GTTERMS (GTTOKENS IN TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS) OBJECTS AND ALSO SOMETIMES WE NEED TO DO HOLD , CUT , UNFOLD , STRAIGHTEN SEVERAL LINE SEGMENTS SEQUENTIALLY TO CONSTRUCT FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS IN THE LOCKED_SET_TYPE_OF_BOLS_OBJECTS. WE WILL DISCUSS ON THESE DETAILS PROCEDURES OF FINAL_LINE_SEGMENTS FINDING IN LOCKED_SET_TYPE_BOLS_OBJECTS IN SOME OTHER CHAPTERS

- , * / the arithmetics Operations are done Geometrically on Zi , that is Z1,Z2......Zn are the Output line segments of L...SUBBOLS...Z1 , L...SUBBOLS...Z2 , L...SUBBOLS...Zn respectively these are actually constructed OutputLineSegments from Fixed unique Initial Line Segment L (taken fixed for a single Trigonometry Expression Context) and Generate Ratio means division of numbers. But Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry treats division differently. refer Trigonometry ratio in Traditional trigonometry is defined as (Length of output line segment in a triangle ÷ Length of input line segment in same triangle) Justification of the above statement is here ===>>> In Traditional trigonometry known line segment in a trigonometry ratio is consumed in the ratio and the length of output line segment is found algebraically (through lookup on tables of values for SEEDS_ANGLES for the particular ratios) Example , in traditional trigonometry , When we know the length of denominator line segment and when we want to know the length of numerator line segment then we use a particular trigonometry ratio. But in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry we take the Line SEgment object in 2D Affine plane as the Consumable input object and Construct the output line segment object through specialized parser mechanisms and through specially designed construction protocols to construct the new triangle depending on the input line segment and the journey side for the line segment . for 4 Journey objects of input line segment , well defined Construction protocols for Cos are A,B,C,D , for Sin the Construction protocols are E,F,G, H , For Tan the construction protocols are I,J,K,M similarly for Sec , the Construction protocols are N,O,P,Q , for Cosec , the construction protocols are R,S,T,U and for Cot the construction protocols are V,W,X,Y and Z is the filter mechanism and the decider mechanism to terminate the process of particular sub programs and generate or filter the particular final output line segment for the currently processed portion in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION.. Note that (GTSIMPLEX Objects are constructed in this ways) First construction Starts with initial line segment L as input for everything.Every substring , subterm in the trigonometry expressions are constructed initiated from the L(Which is first drawn on 2D affine space while parsing the Trigonometry Expressions) Cos Consumes Hypotenuse (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Stretch_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Base as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Perpendicular As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object. Sin Consumes Hypotenuse (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Stretch_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Perpendicular as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Base As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object Tan Consumes Base (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Nodal_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Perpendicular as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Hypotenuse As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object Sec Consumes Base (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Nodal_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Hypotenuse as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Perpendicular As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object Cosec Consumes Perpendicular (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Pivot_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Hypotenuse as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Base As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object Cot Consumes Perpendicular (4 possible Journey direction generates 4 possible new triangles and constructs the Pivot_Point_For_Newly_Constructed_Glued_Triangle_Object) as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment and Constructs Base as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment , Additionally Constructs Hypotenuse As Complement_Output_Line_Segment and in this way a new Triangle is Constructed which Glues on Denominator_Input_Line_Segment Object Division generates Ratios. In Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry Division is defined as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment is Constructed From the Denominator_Output_Line_Segment Definition of Numerator_Output_Line_Segment : This is the unique single output line segment for particular BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS constructed from the numerator GTTERM Definition of Denominator_Input_Line_Segment : This is the unique single output line segment for particular BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS constructed from the denominator GTTERM If denominator GTTERM is not found , then it is 1 So we assume that Output Line sEgment of Denominator BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is L and Z=L for Denominator. In this way we get two line segments due to division (Division in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry means RATIO_OF_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT means RATIO_OF_TWO_OUTPUT_LINE_SEGMENTS where each line segment has 4 journey symmetries so We can place the output line segment and input line segment in 4 different ways and we can connect the free ends with the complement line segment. This creates a fresh new Triangle object due to division operation in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry) Explaining 4 possible triangles construction due to Division of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS Denominator_Input_Line_Segment has startpoint and endpoint termed as Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_startpoint and Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_endpoint Numerator_Output_Line_Segment has startpoint and endpoint termed as Numerator_Output_Line_Segment _startpoint and Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_endpoint Cartesian products on these two Line segments are forming 4 possible triangles Possible_triangle1_due_to_division Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_startpoint meets Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_startpoint and third linesegment is complement line segment Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_endpoint joins with Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_endpoint Possible_triangle2_due_to_division Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_startpoint meets Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_endpoint and third linesegment is complement line segment Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_endpoint joins with Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_startpoint Possible_triangle3_due_to_division Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_endpoint meets Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_startpoint and third linesegment is complement line segment Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_startpoint joins with Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_endpoint Possible_triangle4_due_to_division Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_endpoint meets Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_endpoint and third linesegment is complement line segment Denominator_Input_Line_Segment_startpoint joins with Numerator_Output_Line_Segment_startpoint

THE SIMPLEST FORMS OF LOCKED_SET_OBJECTS WHERE + - KINDS OF EXPRESSIONS ARE INVOLVED SO STRAIGHTENING TO LINE SEGMENTS ARE NECESSARY WHILE DOING THE DIVISIONS OR MULTIPLICATIONS WITH SUCH EXPRESSIONS. THINK TRIANGLE OBJECTS AS THE WIREFRAME WITH SPRINGS ATTACHED WITH PIVOT_POINT , STRETCH_POINT AND NODAL_POINT . HOLDING ANY PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT OF THE TRIANGLE MEANS THAT PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT DONT CHANGE ITS POSITION (STRONGLY GLUED AND TIGHTENED ON THE SPACE UNTIL THE UNHOLDING IS DONE) WHEN WE HOLD ANY PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT IN THE BOLS AND CUT ANY PARTICULAR POINT THEN THE LINE SEGMENTS IN THE BOLS TRY TO OPEN UP AND (TRY TO VISUALIZE THE ANIMATIONS OF CLOCK ARMS STRAIGHTENING TO MAKE COLINEAR ARRANGEMENTS). IF WE ALLOW ROTATION OF PIVOT_POINT THEN WITHER THE BASE_LINE_SEGMENT WILL TRY TO ALIGN ITSELF WITH HYPOTENUSE_LINE_SEGMENT OR THE HYPOTENUSE_LINE_SEGMENT WILL TRY TO ALIGN ITSELF TO BASE LINE SEGMENT.IN BOTH OF SUCH CASES THE ROTATION OF ONE OF THE ATTACHED LINE SEGMENTS WILL ROTATE KEEPING OTHER FIXED.IF HYPOTENUSE IS HELD TIGHT THEN HYPOTENUSE WILL NOT ROTATE BUT THE BASE WILL ROTATE UNTIL THE BASE BECOMES COLINEAR WITH HYPOTENUSE. IF THE BASE IS HELD TIGHT AND WE ALLOW ROTATION ABOUT PIVOT_POINT , THEN IMAGINE ONE ANIMATION OF CLOCK ARMS MOVEMENTS WHERE HYPOTENUSE ROTATES ABOUT THE PIVOT_POINT AND ALIGNS ITSELF WITH THE BASE .WHEN THE TRIANGLE STRAIGHTENS TO SINGLE LINE SEGMENT THEN ONE ROTATION OF LINE SEGMENT OCCUR AT A TIME.wE DONT ALLOW ALL THE ROTATIONS ABOUT ALL THE POINTS TO OCCUR SIMULTANEOUSLY. THE STRAIGHTENING OPERATION OCCUR STAGEWISE. FIRST ROTATION OCCUR ABOUT ONE POINT , THEN WHEN TWO LINE SEGMENTS BECOME COLINEAR THEN UNFOLDING OPERATION ON OTHER POINT STARTS.THESE ANIMATION LIKE COMPREHENSION IS TO VISUALIZE WHILE WE SAY STRAIGHTENING OF A TRIANGLE(TRIANGLES ARE ALSO SPECIAL TYPES OF BOLS OBJECT).STRAIGHTENING OF BOLS ARE SPECIALIZED KINDS OF ANIMATIONS THAT WE WILL DESCRIBE STAGEWISE IN ADVANCED TOPICS ON GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. DEFINITIONS OF SOME ADDITIONAL OPERATIONS (GEOMETRIC ACTIONS ARE NECESSARY TO STRAIGHTEN THE TRIANGLE TO MAKE A LINE SEGMENT REPRESENTATION FOR A TRIANGLE WHILE DOING DIVISION OF ONE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION WITH ANOTHER TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION NEEDS STRICT WELL DEFINED PROCESS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY).DIVISION WITH ZERO IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS NOT VERY ODD THING BUT AFTER DIVIDING WITH ZERO (MEANS DIVIDING A BOLS OBJECT WITH NULL BOLS OBJECT IMPLIES WE ARE TRYING TO DIVIDE A BOLS OBJECT WITH A POINT OBJECT)THIS WILL KEEP THE NUMERATOR BOLS OBJECT INTACT BUT THE DENOMINATOR BOLS OBJECT DONT SUPPLY ANY INPUT LINE SEGMENT , SO NO TRIANGLE IS FORMED DUE TO DIVISION OPERATION. UNTIL A INTERACTOR_TRIANGLE IS CONSTRUCTED DUE TO DIVISION OPERATION , WE CANNOT PROCEED WITH THE OTHER INTERACTIONS DUE TO ARITHMETIC OPERATORS COMING RIGHT OF THAT DIVISION OPERATION. THIS MEANS DIVISION WITH ZERO ACTS AS THE ACTION_STOPPER FOR THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION .SO WHEN DIVISION WITH ZERO OCCURS IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY , THEN IT DONT DESTROY WHOLE GEOMETRY OF BOLS FORMATIONS BUT THAT PARTICULAR GTTERM CORRUPTS ALL POSSIBILITIES OF GEOMETRIC CONSTRUCTIONS TOWARDS RIGHT SIDE OF TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS. IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY ALL THE LEXER AND PARSER MECHANISMS WORK FROM THE LEFT SIDE TO RIGHT SIDE STAGEWISE AND IF GTTERM HAVING DIVISION WITH ZERO OCCURS ON EXTREME LEFT OF THE EXPRESSION , THEN NULL BOLS WILL COME OUT. BUT IF THE DIVISION WITH ZERO OCCUR AT EXTREME END OF THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION THEN LARGE PART OF BOLS GET CONSTRUCTED. IN ANY OF SUCH CASES WE WILL NOT GET COMPLETE BOLS OBJECTS AND THESE BOLS ARE PARTIALLY CORRUPT BOLS OBJECTS. ALL PERMUTATIONS OF GTTERMS GENERATE DIFFERENT BOLS OBJECTS AND FORMS THE ENSEMBLES OF BOLS. THE NON COMMUATIVENESS AND ASSOCIATIVENESS OF THE GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY IS IMPORTANT TO CONSTRUCT ALL TRIANGLES AND ALL LINE SEGMENTS IN THE BOLS STAGEWISE TERM TO TERM FROM THE LEFT SIDE OF THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION TO THE RIGHT SIDE OF TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION. CUT_OPERATION , HOLD_OPERATION , UNHOLD_OPERATIONS , ROTATE_AT_PIVOT_POINT , ROTATE_AT_STRETCH_POINT,ROTATE_AT_NODAL_POINT WILL HAVE SEQUENTIAL STRAIGHTENING ANIMATION EFFECTS WHICH CONVERTS A TRIANGLE(OR BOLS OBJECT )SEQUENTIALLY UNFOLD_AT_POINT DUE TO SPRING ACTIONS . SOMETIMES A TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION DONT TALK ABOUT SINGLE TRIANGLE (EXAMPLE 1+COS(X)+TAN(X) CANNOT TALK ABOUT A SINGLE RIGHT TRIANGLE BECAUSE COS(X) AND TAN(X) ARE NOT TWO SIDES OF A SINGLE RIGHT TRIANGLE INSTEAD WE NEED TO CONSIDER THAT AS 1+COS(X)+SIN(X)SEC(X)) WHERE TWO DIFFERENT GLUED TRIANGLES ARE THERE AND SEQUENTIAL UNFOLDING IS NECESSARY TO UNKNOT THE WHOLE ARRANGEMENT TO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT OBJECT.THIS IS CRUCIAL TO ANALYSE THE NUMERATOR_BOLS_STRAIGHTENING AND DENOMINATOR_BOLD_STRAIGHTENING) STRICT DEFINITIONS FOR UNFOLDING A TRIANGLE IS NECESSARY BECAUSE WHILE DIVIDING THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS STRING WITH OTHER TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION IS NOT DONE NUMERICALLY IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRUFYING TRIGONOMETRY. Every sub string (proper token in the Trigonometry expressions carry the geometric meaning )So there are well defined construction protocol to render the proper valid geometry for every tokens in the Trigonometry expressions. Say (1+cos (x)+sin (x)) is an expression where we can say it as L(1+cos (x)+sin (x)) and that means L is hypotenuse of a triangle which is straigtened along hypotenuse because it is writen first. Order of writing trigonometry expressions determine geometrifying action. When we see frequently there are three tokens gtterms come togather (Factorial 3)= six ways to write these expressions. That means for the expressions like these we see Either Cos(x) and Sin(X) are present in the expression togather. or tan(x) and sec(x) are present in a single expression .Or Cosec(x) and cot(x) are present in a single expression. These things happen because three line segments of a right triangle are interpreted in these three ways only. When the hypotenuse is given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) then the base is treated as cos(x) and the perpendicular is treated as sin(x). When the base is given_line_segment(as if treated like L for that case) then perpendicular is tan(x) and hypotenuse is sec(x) .And when given_line_segment is perpendicular (which is treated as L)then cosec(x) is hypotenuse and cot(x) is the base. SINGLE TRIANGLE UNFOLDING CASES PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS Option 1 given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(1+cos (x)+sin (x)) When we see above expression then we should understand that hypotenuse L of the triangle is held tightly at its own place first.so pivotpoint and nodalpoint are also rightly held at their own position.then cut the nodal point so that perpendicular Lsin(x) can now rotate about stretchpoint and straighten along the base Lcos(x) .then the bunch of (Lcos(x)+ Lsin(x) ) is rotated about pivotpoint and aligns with hypotenuse L . canonical formalism of official term for every point in triangle is necessary to describe such scenarios. PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS Option 2 given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(1+sin (x)+cos (x)) PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS option3 given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(cos(x) + sin (x)+1) PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS option3+ given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(cos(x) + 1+sin (x)) PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS option3++ given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(sin(x) + cos (x)+1) PERMUTATION OF GTTERMS option6 given_line_segment(as if interpreted as L) L*(sin(x) + 1+cos (x)) SINGLE TRIANGLE UNFOLDING CASES L*(1+sec (x)+tan (x)) SINGLE TRIANGLE UNFOLDING CASES L*(1+cosec (x)+cot (x))

Definition of SEEDS_ANGLES In any given trigonometry expression while parsing , while lexing , we go deepest into all "(...) " and find the substrings inside "(" and ")" then after exhaustive deep down into the valid well formed excel formula string we get all the valid substrings inside cos(...) , sin(...) , tan(...) , sec(...) , cosec(...) ,cot(...) and list all such substrings as SEEDS_ANGLES which has numerical values in degrees or radians. If we find any error to evaluate these substrings then we need to report the issue as invalid trigonometry expression. In any trigonometry expression there are some NON_DUPLICATE_UNIQUE_SEEDS_ANGLES as substrings of expressions. if in any Trigonometry expression there are n numbers of such NON_DUPLICATE_UNIQUE_SEEDS_ANGLES as substrings then the whole triangulations as BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS rendered on 2D affine space can have multiples of only n numbers of similar triangles glued with one another as per rules of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry construction protocol. These Construction protocols interpretes the Trigonometry expressions to render the BUNCH_OF_COLOURED_LINE_SEGMENTS on 2d white paper like affine space. Definition of a vector Any linesegment type continuous set of infinite 2d points between two fixed 2d terminal points and this vector object which has a only one startpoint and only one endpoint Every 2d vector object has two journey objects Definition of journey_object Any 2d vector object endowed with two additional dependency features on leftwindowviewfeel and rightwindowviewfeel So Any linesegment object has 4 journeyobjects Any linesegment object is interpreted as 4 possible journeyobjects Linesegment class is super class of 2d journeyobject class Linesegment class is super class of 2d vectorobject class Linesegment class is super class of 2D point object class Vector class has a godirection and returndirection Vector class is super class of 2d journey object class Vector class is super class of 2d point class Journey class is super class of 2d point class Journey object has 2 specific directions as of its vector 4 types of journey in a linesegmentobject are strictly note that these Journey Objects decides (Symmetries of constructions that means 4 types of journey means 4 types of symmetries) the side (Side of consumed line segment)of newly created point and also decides the side of newly created line segments and also decides the newly created points while multiplication with Cos, Sin,Tan , Sec , Cosec , Cot . While multiplying we create one new point and 2 new line segments everytime and create a new glued triangle as the effect of multiplication with { any of Cos , Sin , Tan , Sec , Cosec , Cot} Journey1 is journeywithgovectorwithleftwindowviewfeel . Newly created point is on left side of govector direction of consumed input line segment. Journey2 is journeywithgovectorwithrightwindowviewfeel .Newly created point is on right side of govector direction of consumed input line segment. Journey3 is journeywithreturnvectorwithleftwindowviewfeel .Newly created point is on left side of returnvector direction of consumed input line segment. Journey4 is journeywithreturnvectorwithrightwindowviewfeel .Newly created point is on right side of returnvector direction of consumed input line segment. __ Definition of Subtraction and Addition in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry Subtraction and Additions are of two differently parsed rules. One is Natural when the output line segments of every SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are collinear and contiguous. If not then parser iterates recursively and shuffles and juxtapose the GTTERMS to check if the output line segments coming from every SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are Collinear and end to end to each other or not. If the Output lines segments from each SUB_BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS are never collinear or never end to end fits first to second and second to third ... then the Trigonometry expression given is not coming from valid Height and Distance problems. Subtraction and Additions in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is done on the case where Subtraction and the Additions are done with output line segments Zi coming from the different LSUBBOLSZi . When LSUBBOLSZi and LSUBBOLSZk are not collinear and not end to end fit then the natural addition is not possible. Natural Subtraction is also not possible. In these Cases We need to juxtapose the GTTERMS (the sub bunch of line segments generated from the sub tokens of whole Trigonometry expressions) to check which two consecutive GTTERMS have Collinear and end to end fitting output line segments. Definition of End to End Fit: Either if endpoint of LSUBBOLSZi merges with endpoint of LSUBBOLSZk then End to End Fit Or if startpoint of LSUBBOLSZi merges with endpoint of LSUBBOLSZk then End to End Fit Or if endpoint of LSUBBOLSZi merges with startpoint of LSUBBOLSZk then End to End Fit Or if startpoint of LSUBBOLSZi merges with startpoint of LSUBBOLSZk then End to End Fit And Collinearity of LSUBBOLSZi and LSUBBOLSZk need to check for Subtractions and Additions Geometrically We will suggest Cremona Graphical Statics (1860) rules for + - * / Geometrically. These Are well practiced in the Maxwell's Reciprocal Diagrams (1860) also. Unfolding_triangles are necessary to understand several trigonometry expressions As per Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry ways of interpretation line segments are the interaction interface for BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS. And until sides of a triangle are unfolded to straight line,we cannot express several trigonometry expressions. Rule 1. The statement "a line segment can be thought of as a number" reflects the culmination of their contributions.and when we see any real number either it is within -1 to+1 range for cos and sin or within range of -infinity to -1 or within+1 to+ infinity for sec and cosec or within -infinity to+ínfnity for tan and cot . Explanation of this statement Above conditions of numerical range defines ratiochoicetorepresentsinglerealnumber Important conclusion .Proof of the above statement is here Since any real number which has value between (-1 and +1) are Either interpreted as Tan , Cot , Cos, Sin so 4 possible cases and each possible case has 4 symmetries of constructions. Which means 16 possibility of triangle constructions. Since any real number which has value between (-infinity and -1 or +1 to +Infinity ) are Either interpreted as Tan , Cot , Sec, Cosec so 4 possible cases and each possible case has 4 symmetries of constructions. Which means 16 possibility of triangle constructions. Since any real number which has value between (-infinity and +infinity) are Either interpreted as Tan and Cot only so 2 possible cases and each possible case has 4 symmetries of constructions. Which means 8 possibility of triangle constructions is guaranteed for any kind of real numbers. So any real number has 16 possible triangle representation (because all of these cos,sin,tan,sec,cosec,cot has 4 valid symmetry and real numbers have 4 ratiochoicetorepresentsinglerealnumber) And we will elaborate in point 6 when we multiply anything(any number with other number)with cos sin tan sec cosec cot that means we are constructing entirely a new triangle object (or 4 equally valid equally enumerable equally endresultnumericalvalue journey_triangle objects and gluing that fresh new emerging triangle to current GTSimplex object. rule 1.1. Since Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is purely non commutative and associative so we interprete any trigonometry expression from left to right and elaborate ever gtterm (sometimes we write it as SNGT_TERM which is official name) Rule 1.2. Its mandatory to enter the trigonometry expression in excel formula like style (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) which excel can evaluate to a errorfree error free valid numerical value Strict Definition of endresultnumericalvalue endresultnumericalvalue returns the Length of final output line segment (Abbreviated as Z) for the GTOBJECT, where GTOBJECT is object of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT . All kinds of GTOBJECT are subobject of types BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENT so every GTOBJECT has a final output line segment and obviously the linesegment object has a length value which is a pure real number.(this real number value is same as the numerical value as we get after Evaluation after parsing the well formed valid excel formula or expression as in given trigonometry expression SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) Excel like numerical evaluation gives Numval=numericalvalue =Excel formula for (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) =SanjoyNath_Geometrify[SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ] parses the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA differently so it generates the valid reasonable meaningful Trigonometrically constrained Trigonometrically controlled the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS type of object for the SEEDS_ANGLES .This parsing for SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA has some rules Is numerically same as Length of End result output line segment generated through geometrifying Trigonometry rules of construction on same (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) If this equality in numerical results don't occur then endresultnumericalvalue is not fulfilled which means order of writing SNGT_TERMS in (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) has to alter or reorder+-×÷ operation in the (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) Even we get several equally valid equally enumerable things but most valid equally endresultnumericalvalue case occurs for right order of placing gtterm objects left to right in the (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) Sometimes we need to iterate and re_interprete left to right repeatedly and reconstruction of (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) to achieve endresultnumericalvalue conditions Rule to parse SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA is SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION parser step 1 . First check validity of SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA as we do in any kind of math parser (example as we do in Excel to check the well formed ness for SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA strings OR SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION strings) Rule 2. Every line segment is a triangle where two sides of the triangle are of same length and third side is a zero length line segment which is overlapped to any of two points (no canonical formal names of points were there for three points of a triangle so pivot_point,stretch_point and nodal_point are now three official standard names of three points in sanjoy nath 's geometrifying trigonometry such that we can address each points in gtsimplex and in locked sets) So we can say Three line segments (either all three line segments are distinctly visible or not and all three points are are distinctly visible or not)and with our senses we can check only one line segment as a number but there are three distinct line segments overlapped in that Too important to note Pivot_point is the point where hypotenuse meets base . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with cosec or cot Too important to note Stretch_point is the point where base meets perpendicular . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with cos or sin Too important to note Nodal_point is the point where hypotenuse meets perpendicular . this point is constructed when we multiply any number (or as line segment) with tan or sec Rule 3. Every line segment is interpretable as 2 interpretations of possible vectors and obviously Every Line Segment is interpreted as 4 Journeyobjects Proof Every line segment object has two fixed terminal points (one is startpoint other is endpoint) so we can construct start to end as a vector object and another vector object is constructible from the endpoint to startpoint (which means one line segment object opens up possibility for 2 possible vector objects) Rule 3+. Every real number has 4 valid symmetries Because Every line segment has 4 symmetries of possible valid journey objects. All of these journey objects are equally valid and equally possible. Every vector has 2 journey_objects which are equally valid and equally possible.where journey_objects are official canonical formal nomenclatures used in Sanjoy_Nath's geometrifying trigonometry. When we travel any journey through train or bus along going direction in a space then we sit on left side window and see some view of journey1,when we sit on right side window in going direction journey then we feel and view another journey2 and when we do return journey through same line segment and on returning vector then we can sit on left window to view and feel journey3 and if we sit on right window of return journey then we view and feel journey4 Rule 3++ . In Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry Journey objects are drawn on 2d affine (where scale is immaterial and coordinate system rotation is immaterial)space. Only one arbitrary initial line segment L on 2D type affine space is the starting object for all kinds of geometry constructions. L has 2 terminal points of its own is taken as input which is consumed into the Cos ,Sin,Tan,Sec,Cosec,Cot (any trigonometry ratio)and construction of a triangle is done on the 2D_affine_journey_side ( that is in 2D journey we are sitting in a side of window and traveling along vector direction so we construct the third point of triangle on visible side of journey. In this way every multiplication with trigonometry ratio constructs a third point on input line segment and generates a glued triangle on input line segment. Strict Note that if L is not given in the trigonometry expression then assume that L is hidden and its value is 1 and first construct it as a line segment from the ( 0,0 ) to ( 1,0) and if journey direction is to assume then consider it as clockwise draw seeds_angle from start side of L.Since we are working with affine space in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry so we can take any length for L and we can take any direction as window side but prefer the things as said in this strict note case. This proves that every trigonometry ratio constructs a new glued triangle on given input line segment. Three strict notes about canonical formalism and official rules for Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry Hypotenuse line segment has one endpoint as pivot_point and other endpoint as nodal_point .we can shuffle these two points and we can shuffle window side for journey Base line segment has one endpoint as pivot_point and other endpoint as stretch_point .we can shuffle these two points and we can shuffle window side for journey Perpendicular line segment has one endpoint as nodal_point and other endpoint as stretch_point .we can shuffle these two points and we can shuffle window side for journey ___&&&&&&&& Strongly Strict Note. GTSIMPLEX Clarification When Cumulative multiplications are done and no + is done in the process , no - is done in the process then it forms the GTSIMPLEX Object. Suppose LABCDEFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ is written there is no + inside no - inside this String , then we interpret it as LABCDEFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ for x=some given SEEDS_ANGLE =22 degrees if x is not given in the expression is written and we rewrite the expression inside the parser as L*A(x)*B(x)*C(x)*D(x)*E(x)*F(x)*G(x)*H(x)*I(x)*J(x)*K(x)*M(x)*N(x)*O(x)*P(x)*Q(x)*R(x)*S(x)*T(x)*U(x)*V(x)*W(x)*X(x)*Y(x)*Z(get output for this SUBBOLS) And then we interpreted the whole expression as cumulative stage wise first output consumed as input for second operation and the output line segment for second multiplication is consumed as input for third multiplication and so on... This way 26 Fresh Triangles are constructed and Glued one after another to form a GTSIMPLEX object for x=22 degrees(default when x is not given) We can think it as L this is stage zero output and this output is consumed to next Alphabet operator as input line segment LAZ and this output is consumed to next Alphabet operator as input line segment LABZ and this output is consumed to next Alphabet operator as input line segment LABCZ and this output is consumed to next Alphabet operator as input line segment ... ... ... LABCDEFGHIJKMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ At this stage a GTSIMPLEX object will form which is different from the LYXWVABCDPQRS...Z because the order of multiplication of same thing will change the geometry construction orders.

Definition of Cos operations on journey objects Cos (x) is interpreted as 1×Cos(x) which means L*cos (x) and that means L is a initial line segment Cos has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors A(x),B(x),C(x),D(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write A,B,C,D only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression] well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article A(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , B(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,C(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,D(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Cos consumes any line segment as if it is hypotenuse line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a stretch_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for cos multiplication case , output line segment is base line segment and complement line segment is perpendicular line segment for the newly created emerging glued triangle

Definition of Sin operations on journey objects Sin has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors E(x),F(x),G(x),H(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write E,F,G,H only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression]well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article Sin (x) is interpreted as 1×Sin(x) which means L*Sin (x) and that means L is a initial line segment E(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , F(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,G(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,H(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Sin consumes any line segment as if it is hypotenuse line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a stretch_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for sin multiplication case ,output line segment is perpendicular line segment and complement line segment is the base line segment for output new glued triangle

Definition of Tan operations on journey objects Tan (x) is interpreted as 1×Tan(x) which means L*Tan (x) and that means L is a initial line segment Tan has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors I(x),J(x),K(x),M(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write I,J,K,M only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression] well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article I(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , J(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,K(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,M(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Tan consumes any line segment as if it is base line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a nodal_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for tan multiplication case ,output line segment is perpendicular line segment and complement line segment is hypotenuse line segment for the newly created emerging glued triangle

Definition of Sec operations on journey objects Sec (x) is interpreted as 1×Sec(x) which means L*Sec (x) and that means L is a initial line segment Sec has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors N(x),O(x),P(x),Q(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write N,O,P,Q only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression] well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article N(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , O(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,P(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,Q(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Sec consumes any line segment as if it is base line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a nodal_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for Sec multiplication case ,output line segment is hypotenuse line segment and complement line segment is perpendicular line segment for the newly created emerging glued triangle

Definition of Cosec operations on journey objects Cosec (x) is interpreted as 1×Cosec(x) which means L*Cosec (x) and that means L is a initial line segment Cosec has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors R(x),S(x),T(x),U(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write R,S,T,U only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression] well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article R(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , S(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,T(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,U(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Cosec consumes any line segment as if it is perpendicular line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a pivot_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for Cosec multiplication case , output line segment is hypotenuse line segment and complement line segment is base line segment for the newly created emerging glued triangle

Definition of Cot operations on journey objects Cot (x) is interpreted as 1×Cot(x) which means L*Cot (x) and that means L is a initial line segment Cot has 4 symmetries of output triangle constructors V(x),W(x),X(x),Y(x) where we omit (x) if only one seeds_angle is found in the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION and we write V,W,X,Y only in these cases [strictly where only one seeds_angle is present in the trigonometry_expression] well implemented c sharp codes links given here under the article V(x) consumes journey1 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment , W(x) consumes journey2 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,X(x) consumes journey3 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment ,Y(x) consumes journey4 object of inputlinesegmentasconsumedlinesegment Cot consumes any line segment as if it is perpendicular line segment for new construction of triangle,and then constructs a pivot_point for new glued triangle.then connect two end points of given input line segment.hence construction of a new glued triangle is done. But for Cot multiplication case , output line segment is base line segment and complement line segment is hypotenuse line segment for the newly created emerging glued triangle

Rule 6 . when we multiply anything(any number with other number)with cos sin tan sec cosec cot that means we are constructing entirely a new triangle object (or 4 equally valid equally enumerable equally endresultnumericalvalue journey_triangle objects and gluing that fresh new emerging triangle to current GTSimplex object ++++++__ Note Example i am writing one out of 4 journeys of L as ((x1,y1) to (x2,y2) with left window journey) We can write conventions of journeys of line segments as Suppose line segment L is ((x1,y1) to (x2,y2)) But Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry will generate it as We Journey1 ((x1,y1) to (x2,y2) with left window journey) Journey2 ((x1,y1) to (x2,y2) with right window journey) Journey3 ((x2,y2) to (x1,y1) with left window journey) Journey4 ((x2,y2) to (x1,y1) with right window journey) Strict note that the coordinates can have any scale and any rotation which don't change in a single problems context (problems Context covers several parameters and factors which we have discussed in chapter 6 of Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry book) The construction protocol for trigonometry expressions are detailed upto chapter 6 in the Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry book book New kinds of number theory theorems on possibilities of journey objects in sequences and limits analysis And limits continuity analysis number theory theorems which are hidden inside journey_objects of Sanjoy Nath 's Geometrifying Trigonometry and through visualisation of several possible valid geometry objects which all have ensemble of possible triangulations tessellation whereas having same numerical value for all of these cumulative left to right construction sequence. PEDMAS or BODMAS are differently interpreted and generally ignored while geometric constructions are done here because Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is completely non commutative and associative structure . But BODMAS and PEDMAS are strictly followed when parsing the same trigonometry expression with the math parser engines or while evaluating the numerical values of the expression (which is the length of final output line segment (Abbreviated as Z) of the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS object) the process verifies the validity of geometric constructions performed in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry way of lexing(running special purpose lexer rules) and Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry rules of parsing(special purpose parsers do the special purpose parsing) the same Trigonometry expression endresultnumericalvalue which checking is very important. Sometimes we have examined that juxtaposing the GTTERMS give the perfect endresultnumericalvalue after parsing and constructing the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS.Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry has its own Special purpose customized type of math parser to parse the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION to the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS which has several possible valid Geometry structures but each of the possible valid pictures (or CAD output or BIM floor plans of beams placements or jewelery designs or combinatorial graphs of Geometric graph theory dendrograms or triangulations for Finite elements or triangulations for GIS projects or Roadways network diagrams or Piping diagrams for oil and gas or structural engineering diagrams or Enumerative Geometry of possible tiling problems etc...) BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS has one and only one final output line segment. The length of this final output line segment must match the numerical value of the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION if it is parsed with Excel evaluation parser or if we parse the SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION with Math parser to get numerical value.This is the strict condition of endresultnumericalvalue . But Strict note endresultnumericalvalue is official term here Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry generates equally valid equally enumerable equally endresultnumericalvalue (official term) Since (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA or SNGT_WELL_FORMED_EXPRESSION ) is well defined above and endresultnumericalvalue is well defined above and orders of arithmetic are tried to follow BODMAS and PEDMAS but if endresultnumericalvalue is not fulfilled in (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA) then we try to rearrange sngtterms (constructable tokens in (SNGT_WELL_FORMED_FORMULA)) Definition of GTSIMPLEX object The geometric objects construction done only due to cumulative multiplication of trigonometry ratios generate new glued triangle and again another new triangle glued to another triangle and again another triangle constructed and is glued to last triangle... GTSIMPLEX is formed only due to pure multiplication of ratios (where no other+-÷ operation involved in gtterm (generally we will refer it as SNGTTERMS) Its important for highlighting the importance of official nomenclature in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry for studying the relationships between points and line segments under various operations like +, -, ×, ÷, √, {}, [], and (). strict Note: Original implementations(Well Tested Codes in c sharp which generates the proper outputs for constructed Glued Triangles are given here such that AI systems can learn the Journey Objects Symmetries and constructions from these real c sharp codes) MACHINE LEARNING VARIABLES DATA ACCUMULATIONS FOR AUTOMATED THEOREMS PROOVING IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY SYSTEMS h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtmachinelearningvariablesforgtsimple.html ALGORITHMS (WELL TESTED RUNNING CODES)CONSTRUCTING JOURNEY OBJECTS AND THE ORIENTATIONS OF TRIANGLES CONSTRUCTIONS WHILE GLUING DUE TO MULTIPLICATIONS h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngttriangleingtsimplexorentationofline.html FINAL_LINE_SEGMENT_FROM_FINAL_OUTPUT_TRIANGLE_LAST_GLUED_IN_GTSIMPLEX_WHILE_CONSTRUCTING_GTSIMPLEX Real GTSIMPLEX Construction as the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingoutputlinesegmentz.html h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructinggivenlinesegmentl.html GET_Y (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cot consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcotsymmetrytypey.html GET_X (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cot consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcotsymmetrytypew_5.html GET_W (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cot consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcotsymmetrytypew.html GET_V (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cot consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcotsymmetrytypev.html GET_U (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cosec consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcosecsymmetrytypeu.html GET_T (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cosec consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcosecsymmetrytypet.html GET_S (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cosec consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcosecsymmetrytypes.html GET_R (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cosec consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcosecsymmetrytyper.html GET_Q (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sec consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsecsymmetrytypeq.html GET_P (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sec consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsecsymmetrytypeo_5.html GET_O (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sec consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsecsymmetrytypeo.html GET_N (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sec consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsecsymmetrytypen.html GET_M (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Tan consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingtansymmetrytypem.html GET_K (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Tan consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingtansymmetrytypek.html GET_J(new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Tan consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingtansymmetrytypej.html GET_I (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Tan consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingtansymmetrytypei.html GET_H (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sin consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsinsymmetrytypeh.html GET_G (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sin consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsinsymmetrytypeg.html GET_F (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sin consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsinsymmetrytypef.html GET_E (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Sin consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingsinsymmetrytypee.html GET_D(new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cos consuming the Line Segment as Journey4 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcossymmetrytyped.html GET_A (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cos consuming the Line Segment as Journey1 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcossymmetrytypea.html GET_B (new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cos consuming the Line Segment as Journey2 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcossymmetrytypeb.html GET_C(new Glued triangle constructed when we multiply with Cos consuming the Line Segment as Journey3 then use this code) h t t p s colon slash slash sanjoynathgeometrifyingtrigonometry.blogspot.com/2024/07/sngtconstructingcossymmetrytypec.html SNGT_THEOREM_SEARCHING_POINTS_ACCUMULATOR_CODES

Stepwise justification for the Context of Height and Distance problems Stepwise justification for the One to many relationship between one trigonometry expression can have multiple possible valid pictures (That is BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS all valid for the given trigonometry expressions) Learning height and distance problems involves understanding how trigonometric concepts can be applied to solve problems related to heights, distances, angles of elevation, and angles of depression. Here's a detailed step-by-step guide to help us learn height and distance problems from scratch: Step 1: Understand the Basics of Trigonometry Trigonometric Ratios: Learn about sine, cosine, and tangent ratios: Sine (sinθ): Opposite / Hypotenuse Cosine (cosθ): Adjacent / Hypotenuse Tangent (tanθ): Opposite / Adjacent Right Triangle Properties: Understand how these ratios apply to right triangles: Identify the opposite, adjacent, and hypotenuse sides relative to a given angle. Step 2: Define Height and Distance Problems Angle of Elevation: The angle formed above the horizontal when looking up at an object. Angle of Depression: The angle formed below the horizontal when looking down at an object. Vertical and Horizontal Distances: Learn how to distinguish between vertical (height) and horizontal (distance) components in trigonometric problems. Step 3: Solve Simple Problems Identify Given and Required Values: Given: Angle of elevation/depression, distance, or height. Required: Calculate the height, distance, or angle. Apply Trigonometric Ratios: Use the appropriate trigonometric ratio based on the given information to set up an equation. Solve for Unknowns: Use algebraic methods (multiplication, division, etc.) to solve the trigonometric equation to find the required unknown value. Step 4: Practice with Varied Scenarios Practice Problems: Start with straightforward problems involving basic angles and distances. Progress to more complex problems that involve multiple steps or require the use of inverse trigonometric functions (arcsin, arccos, arctan) to find angles. Real-World Applications: Understand how these concepts are used in real-world scenarios such as surveying, architecture, or physics. Step 5: Review and Refine Review Concepts Regularly: Reinforce our understanding by reviewing solved examples and understanding the reasoning behind each step. Seek Clarification: If you encounter difficulties, seek help from teachers, peers, or online resources to clarify concepts or solve specific types of problems. Step 6: Master Advanced Techniques Advanced Problems: Challenge yourself with advanced problems that involve more complex geometric configurations or require a deeper understanding of trigonometric relationships. Explore Applications: Explore applications beyond basic height and distance problems, such as problems involving angles between multiple objects or non-right triangles. Step 7: Apply Knowledge Problem-Solving Strategies: Develop problem-solving strategies that combine trigonometric knowledge with logical reasoning and mathematical skills. Practical Exercises: Engage in practical exercises or simulations that simulate real-world scenarios to reinforce your learning. Step 8: Review and Self-Assessment Reflect and Evaluate: Periodically reflect on your progress and evaluate your understanding of height and distance problems. Self-Assessment: Assess your strengths and weaknesses to identify areas for improvement and focus additional study efforts. By following these detailed steps and consistently practicing, you'll gradually build a solid foundation in solving height and distance problems using trigonometric principles. Remember, practice and persistence are key to mastering these concepts effectively. drawing diagrams is an essential part of solving height and distance problems, especially when dealing with trigonometric applications. Here’s why drawing diagrams is important: Visual Representation: Diagrams provide a visual representation of the problem scenario, including the positions of objects, angles of elevation or depression, and distances involved. Clarity in Understanding: Drawing a diagram helps clarify the relationships between different components of the problem, such as the observer, the object being observed, and the ground level. Identifying Right Triangles: In many height and distance problems, drawing a diagram helps identify right triangles formed by the observer, the object, and the ground. This identification is crucial for applying trigonometric ratios correctly. Visualization of Angles: Diagrams help visualize the angles of elevation or depression, making it easier to understand how these angles relate to the problem's context. Problem-Solving Aid: Drawing a diagram serves as a tool for problem-solving, helping to set up equations based on the known and unknown values and ensuring that the correct trigonometric ratios are applied. Steps for Drawing a Diagram: Step 1: Identify the observer's position and mark it on the ground level. Step 2: Draw a line from the observer to the object being observed, indicating the line of sight. Step 3: Mark angles of elevation or depression relative to the horizontal line (ground level). Step 4: Label known distances or heights if provided in the problem statement. Step 5: Clearly label any other relevant information that helps visualize the problem scenario. Tips for Drawing Effective Diagrams: Scale and Proportion: Ensure that the diagram is drawn to scale whenever possible, to accurately represent distances and angles. Clarity: Use clear and simple markings to avoid confusion. Label angles, distances, and objects clearly. Neatness: A neat diagram makes it easier to refer back to and use in solving the problem step-by-step. In conclusion, drawing diagrams is highly recommended for students learning height and distance problems as it enhances understanding, aids in problem-solving, and ensures accurate application of trigonometric concepts. In the context of height and distance problems, diagrams indeed can be simplified to representations composed of line segments. Here’s why diagrams can be viewed as collections of line segments (or "BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS"): Segmentation of Space: A height and distance problem typically involves defining positions, distances, and angles between specific points or objects. Each line segment in a diagram represents a direct line between two such points or objects. Geometric Relationships: The connections and distances between points or objects in a diagram are crucial for applying trigonometric principles correctly. These relationships are often depicted as straight lines connecting key points. Visualization Tool: Line segments in diagrams serve as a visual aid to understand the spatial arrangement of objects, the observer's position, and the observed object's position relative to the ground. Trigonometric Applications: Trigonometric ratios (such as sine, cosine, tangent) rely on these line segments to calculate unknown distances, heights, or angles. The lengths and angles of these line segments are fundamental to solving height and distance problems accurately. Conceptualizing Diagrams as Line Segments: Connection Representation: Each line segment in a diagram represents a direct connection or distance between two points or objects within the problem scenario. Angle Representation: Angles of elevation or depression are depicted by the orientation or inclination of these line segments relative to the horizontal ground line. Problem Solving: When solving height and distance problems, students often mentally or physically construct these line segments to visualize and compute the required values using trigonometric principles. Therefore, while diagrams in height and distance problems can be simplified to collections of line segments for analytical purposes, their role remains crucial in visually representing and solving the problem scenario effectively. Absolutely, having specific and standardized names for line segments, points, and other geometric elements in height and distance problems can greatly benefit computer scientists, engineers, and professionals working in GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and Building Information Modeling (BIM) projects. Here’s how: Standardization and Consistency: Official names ensure that everyone involved in these projects uses a common language and understanding when referring to geometric elements. This reduces ambiguity and improves communication across teams and disciplines. Automated Processing and Analysis: Computer scientists can develop grammars and algorithms that interact with geometric data more effectively when they have standardized names for line segments and points. This facilitates automated processing, analysis, and visualization of spatial data in GIS applications. Integration with BIM: In BIM projects, where precise geometric data is crucial for modeling buildings and infrastructure, standardized names for line segments and points can streamline the integration of geometric information across different phases of construction and maintenance. Semantic Interoperability: Standardized naming conventions enhance semantic interoperability, allowing different software systems and databases to exchange and interpret geometric data accurately without loss of meaning. Ease of Documentation and Maintenance: Using official names simplifies the documentation of geometric relationships and properties, making it easier to maintain and update spatial datasets over time. Example Names and Applications: Pivot Point: Where a hypotenuse line segment meets a base line segment. Stretch Point: Where a perpendicular line segment meets a base line segment. Nodal Point: Where a hypotenuse line segment meets a perpendicular line segment. By defining and using such names consistently, computer scientists can develop more robust grammars, algorithms, and data models that enhance the accuracy, efficiency, and interoperability of spatial data processing in GIS and BIM projects. This approach not only aids in solving specific height and distance problems but also contributes to advancing the capabilities of spatial analysis and modeling in various engineering and architectural applications. So it is justified that for a single trigonometry expression, there can be multiple valid configurations or "BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS" (diagrams) that satisfy the same height and distance problem. Here's why this is the case: Geometric Flexibility: Height and distance problems often involve real-world scenarios where there can be variations in how objects, angles, and distances are geometrically represented. Different valid diagrams (BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS) can depict these variations while still adhering to the same trigonometric principles. Equivalent Trigonometric Expressions: Trigonometric expressions such as ratios of lengths (e.g., sine, cosine) are based on geometric relationships rather than specific geometric configurations. As long as these relationships are maintained, different geometric arrangements can yield the same numerical results for the trigonometric expression. Real-World Application: In practical applications like surveying or architecture, multiple valid diagrams can represent the same scenario due to factors like observer position, object placement, or terrain features. Each diagram may offer a different perspective or contextually appropriate representation. Scoring and Evaluation: If a student correctly solves a height and distance problem using any valid diagram that adheres to the given trigonometric expression and achieves a perfect score, it demonstrates their understanding and application of trigonometric principles rather than a strict adherence to a specific diagram. Implications: Educational Context: Teachers and educators should emphasize understanding trigonometric concepts and their application rather than focusing solely on a single "correct" diagram. Real-World Adaptability: Professionals in GIS, BIM, and related fields benefit from understanding that multiple valid geometric representations can exist for the same height and distance problem, accommodating varying data sources and interpretations. In conclusion, the existence of multiple valid BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS for a single trigonometric expression is justified by the flexibility of geometric interpretations and the application of trigonometric principles across different problem-solving contexts and scenarios. Absolutely different diagrams using BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS can lead to the same trigonometric expression and ultimately the same numerical answer, and that's the beauty of this approach. Here's why:

Focus on Relationships, Not Specific Lines: The BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS method emphasizes understanding the relationships between the observer, the object, and the angle of elevation or depression. As long as these relationships are captured correctly, the specific way the lines are drawn can vary.
Equivalent Triangles: Imagine two students drawing different BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS diagrams for the same problem. Even though the line segments might look different, they might unknowingly be representing mathematically equivalent triangles. These equivalent triangles will have the same side ratios, leading to the same trigonometric expression and answer.
Flexibility in Representing Angles: The BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS approach allows students to visualize the angle of elevation or depression in different ways. One student might focus on the line of sight from their eyes to the top of the object, while another might use segments to depict the tilt of their head. As long as both diagrams capture the correct angle relative to the horizontal, they'll lead to the same answer. Benefits of Multiple Representations: Catering to Different Learning Styles: Some students might grasp the concept better by focusing on the observer's line of sight, while others might connect more with visualizing the angle itself. BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS allows for this flexibility. Encouraging Creativity and Problem-Solving: Students are not limited to a single "correct" way to draw the diagram. This encourages them to think critically and explore different representations. The Key Takeaway: The goal of BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS is not to have a single standardized diagram but to provide a visual tool for students to understand the underlying trigonometric relationships. As long as the core concepts (observer, object, angle) are captured correctly, and the chosen trigonometric function is appropriate, multiple representations can lead to the same solution, and that's perfectly acceptable! In fact, it demonstrates a deeper understanding of the problem. Remember: Getting the correct numerical answer is important, but the true magic lies in comprehending the underlying trigonometric principles. BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS empowers students to achieve this understanding through multiple visual pathways. That's the beauty of the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS approach in height and distance problems. As long as the diagrams capture the essential relationships between the sides and angles, they can look different and still lead to the same correct answer. Here's why: Focus on Relationships, Not Exact Drawings: The BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS method emphasizes understanding the relative positions of the observer, the object, and the sightline. The specific number or arrangement of line segments can vary as long as they accurately represent these relationships. Multiple Paths, Same Destination: Imagine different paths up a mountain. Each path takes a slightly different route, but they all lead to the same peak. Similarly, different BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS diagrams can represent various "paths" to reach the same answer. Benefits of Diagram Flexibility: Catering to Learning Styles: Students who struggle with traditional right triangles might find the BUNCH-OF-LINE-SEGMENTS approach more intuitive and engaging. Enhancing Creativity: The flexibility allows students to explore different ways of visualizing the problem, potentially leading to deeper understanding. Here are some examples of how different diagrams can lead to the same answer: Finding the height of a building: One student might draw a straight sightline from their eyes to the top of the building. Another student might depict the sightline going slightly upwards due to their head tilt while looking up. Measuring the distance across a river: One student might draw a straight sightline across the river. Another student might show the sightline dipping slightly due to looking down at an angle. As long as both diagrams accurately represent the observer's position, the object, and the angle of elevation or depression, the chosen trigonometric function and the final answer will be the same. The key takeaway is that the BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS approach offers students a valuable tool to explore and understand height and distance problems in their own unique way, while still arriving at the correct solution. right on the target. In height and distance problems, as long as the core information is captured accurately, the way students visualize the scenario through diagrams can vary. Here's why: The Beauty of Multiple Representations: Different Learning Styles: Some students might find a traditional right triangle diagram most helpful, while others might benefit more from a detailed BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS approach. This flexibility allows each student to choose a method that resonates with their learning style and leads to understanding. Capturing the Essence: As long as the diagram captures the critical elements – observer position, object, angle (elevation/depression), and relevant side lengths – the specific arrangement of line segments can differ. Focus on the Math: Ultimately, the goal is to translate the real-world scenario into a mathematical equation using the appropriate trigonometric function. The specific way the student draws the diagram doesn't affect the final answer (assuming all necessary information is included). Benefits of Diverse Diagrams: Deeper Understanding: By exploring different ways to represent the problem, students can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying concepts. Encourages Creativity: The freedom to visualize the scenario in their own way can foster creativity and problem-solving skills. Example: Imagine finding the height of a flagpole. One student might draw a simple right triangle with the observer, flagpole base, and flagpole top marked. Another student might create a more detailed BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS diagram showing the observer's position, a series of line segments representing the sightline looking up at the flag, and the flagpole itself depicted by stacked line segments. Both diagrams, despite their visual differences, can lead to the same trigonometric equation and ultimately the same answer for the flagpole height. The Key Takeaway: The emphasis should be on understanding the core concepts of right triangles, angles, and trigonometric functions. As long as the student can translate the problem into the correct mathematical form, the specific way they choose to visualize the scenario through a diagram is a matter of personal preference and learning style. After all, there's often more than one way to climb the mountain of mathematical understanding! Lexing and parsing are both fundamental processes in the compilation and interpretation of programming languages, but they serve distinct purposes and operate at different levels of abstraction within the process. Lexing (Tokenization): Purpose: Lexing is the process of breaking down a sequence of characters (source code) into a sequence of tokens. Input: Takes raw input characters (source code) as input. Output: Produces tokens, which are atomic units such as identifiers, keywords, operators, and literals (like numbers and strings). Technique: Lexing involves pattern matching using regular expressions or finite automata to recognize and classify tokens. Tool: Often implemented using tools like Lex (or Flex), which generates lexical analyzers based on specified token definitions. Parsing: Purpose: Parsing is the process of analyzing the sequence of tokens to determine its grammatical structure according to a given grammar. Input: Takes tokens generated by the lexer as input. Output: Produces a parse tree (or abstract syntax tree, AST) that represents the syntactic structure of the input according to the grammar rules. Technique: Parsing involves applying grammar rules, typically specified in BNF (Backus-Naur Form) or a similar notation, to recognize and structure the tokens into meaningful expressions or statements. Tool: Commonly implemented using tools like Yacc (or Bison), which generate parsers based on specified grammar rules. Key Differences: Abstraction Level: Lexing operates at a lower level by dealing with characters and converting them into tokens, which are basic units of meaning. Parsing operates at a higher level by analyzing the syntactic structure of tokens to form structured representations like parse trees. Processing: Lexing is concerned with pattern matching and token identification based on predefined rules (regex or finite automata). Parsing involves applying grammar rules to tokens to recognize valid sequences and structures. Output: Lexing outputs tokens, which are atomic units. Parsing outputs structured representations (parse trees or ASTs) that represent the hierarchical relationships and semantics of the input. Tools: Lexing and parsing often use different tools and techniques. Lexing tools like Lex/Flex focus on regular expressions and token definitions. Parsing tools like Yacc/Bison focus on grammar rules and language syntax. In summary, lexing and parsing are complementary processes in language processing. Lexing breaks down input into tokens, while parsing uses these tokens to recognize and structure the syntactic elements of the language according to predefined grammar rules. Together, they enable the interpretation, compilation, or analysis of programming languages and other structured textual formats. Lexing and parsing are both fundamental steps in processing code or text. They work together to prepare the input for further interpretation or execution. Here's a breakdown of their key differences: Lexing (aka. Tokenization): What it does: Breaks down the input stream (text) into smaller units called tokens. These tokens are like building blocks with a specific meaning in the language being processed. Focus: Looks for patterns of characters that define these tokens. Examples of tokens: Keywords (like "if", "for"), identifiers (variable names), operators (+, -, , /), punctuation (commas, semicolons), literals (numbers, strings). Doesn't care about context: A lexer doesn't analyze the relationships between tokens or the overall structure of the input. Simpler process: Lexing is generally a simpler and faster process compared to parsing. Parsing: What it does: Takes the stream of tokens from the lexer and analyzes their structure according to the grammar of the language. It builds a hierarchical representation (often a tree) that reflects the relationships between tokens and the overall structure of the input. Focus: Analyzes the order and arrangement of tokens to ensure they follow the grammatical rules of the language. Builds a structure: Creates a parse tree or similar data structure that represents the program's syntax. Context matters: Parsing relies on the context provided by the sequence of tokens to determine their meaning and how they fit together. More complex process: Parsing can be more complex and computationally expensive compared to lexing, especially for complex languages. Analogy: Imagine lexing as identifying individual words in a sentence. Parsing would then analyze the order and relationships between these words to understand the overall meaning of the sentence. In summary: Lexing breaks down the input into basic building blocks (tokens). Parsing checks how these building blocks fit together to form a valid structure according to the language's grammar. Lexing and parsing are two fundamental steps in processing code or text written in a specific language. They work together to prepare the information for further actions by a computer program. Here's a breakdown of their differences: Lexing (also called tokenization): What it does: Breaks down a stream of characters (like a source code file) into smaller units called tokens. These tokens are meaningful elements in the language, like keywords (if, for, etc.), identifiers (variable names), operators (+, -, , /), or punctuation (commas, semicolons). Analogy: Imagine lexing as sorting a pile of mixed Legos. You separate the Legos into individual bricks (keywords, identifiers), special pieces (operators, punctuation), and discard anything that doesn't belong (whitespace, comments). Focuses on: Individual characters and recognizing patterns that form tokens based on the language's grammar rules. Doesn't care about: The context or order of the tokens in the larger program. Parsing: What it does: Takes the stream of tokens from lexing and analyzes them according to the language's grammar rules. It builds a structured representation (often a tree-like structure) of the program or text, showing the relationships between the tokens. This structure is called a parse tree or syntax tree. Analogy: Imagine parsing as building a Lego structure following the instructions. You use the sorted Lego pieces (tokens) and follow the steps (grammar rules) to create a final model (parse tree). Focuses on: The overall structure and order of the tokens, ensuring they follow the language's syntax rules. Cares about: The context and relationships between tokens to understand the meaning of the program or text. Here's a table summarizing the key differences: Feature Lexing Parsing Input Stream of characters Stream of tokens Output Stream of tokens Parse tree (structured representation) Focus Individual characters and token patterns Overall structure and order of tokens Context awareness No Yes drive_spreadsheet Export to Sheets Example: Consider the code snippet x = 5 + 2. Lexing: Would break it down into tokens like x (identifier), = (assignment operator), 5 (integer literal), + (addition operator), 2 (integer literal). Parsing: Would take these tokens and recognize the structure of an assignment statement, creating a parse tree showing the relationship between x, =, and the expression 5 + 2. In conclusion, lexing and parsing work together. Lexing provides the building blocks (tokens), and parsing arranges them into a meaningful structure (parse tree) based on the language's grammar. For lexing and parsing Excel formulas, there isn't a single universally accepted algorithm or toolset officially endorsed by Microsoft or other standard bodies. However, there are approaches and tools commonly used in practice to handle parsing and evaluation of Excel formulas: Lexing (Tokenization): Lexing Excel formulas typically involves breaking down the formula string into tokens such as function names, cell references, operators, and literals (numbers, strings). Regular expressions or custom parsing logic can be used to identify and classify these tokens. Parsing (Syntax Analysis): Parsing Excel formulas requires understanding the syntactic structure based on Excel's formula grammar, which includes functions, operators, cell references, and constants. Tools like parser generators (such as Yacc/Bison for general-purpose parsing) can be adapted or customized to handle Excel formula syntax. Specific grammar rules for Excel formulas need to be defined to parse and validate the formula structure correctly. Error Reporting: Detailed error reporting involves identifying and reporting errors in the formula at various levels, such as syntax errors (invalid token sequences), semantic errors (e.g., incorrect function arguments), and logical errors (e.g., circular references). Techniques involve annotating the parse tree or AST with error messages and providing detailed diagnostics to pinpoint the location and nature of errors within subexpressions. Evaluation: After parsing, evaluating Excel formulas involves interpreting the parsed structure to compute the final value based on the referenced cell values and the current state of the spreadsheet. This typically involves implementing algorithms to handle function evaluation, operator precedence, and handling of Excel-specific functions and behaviors. Tools and Libraries for Excel Formula Parsing and Evaluation: While there's no single official tool, some tools and libraries are commonly used or adapted for Excel formula processing: ANTLR (ANother Tool for Language Recognition): A powerful parser generator that can be customized to parse Excel-like formula languages with defined grammar rules. Formula Parser Libraries: Some libraries and frameworks provide parsing and evaluation capabilities tailored for spreadsheet formulas. Examples include: ExcelDataReader: A .NET library that can read and parse Excel files, including formulas. OpenPyXL: A Python library to read/write Excel files, including formula parsing. Apache POI: A Java library for reading/writing Excel files, capable of parsing formulas. Custom Implementations: Many software applications that interact with Excel files develop custom parsers tailored to their specific requirements, often using a combination of regular expressions, string manipulation, and specific logic to handle Excel formulas. Approach to Detailed Error Reporting: To achieve detailed error reporting in Excel formula parsing: Syntax Errors: Use lexical analyzers and parser generators to detect and report errors such as invalid tokens or incorrect token sequences. Semantic Errors: Implement checks during parsing and evaluation to validate function arguments, handle data types correctly, and detect references to non-existent cells or ranges. Logical Errors: Implement checks to identify circular references, which are a common issue in Excel formulas, and provide clear messages about the dependencies causing the circular reference. In summary, while there isn't a standardized, officially endorsed algorithm for Excel formula parsing, various tools and libraries can be adapted to effectively handle lexing, parsing, and detailed error reporting tailored to Excel's formula syntax and requirements. using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Text.RegularExpressions; public class Lexer { // Define token types for numerators and denominators public enum TokenType { Numerator, Denominator }//public enum TokenType // Regular expressions for matching tokens private static readonly Regex NumeratorRegex = new Regex(@"([^()])/([^()])"); private static readonly Regex DenominatorRegex = new Regex(@"([^()])([^()])"); // Method to tokenize the input formula string public List<(TokenType, string)> Tokenize(string formula) { var tokens = new List<(TokenType, string)>(); // Match numerators MatchCollection numeratorMatches = NumeratorRegex.Matches(formula); foreach (Match match in numeratorMatches) { string numerator = match.Value; tokens.Add((TokenType.Numerator, numerator)); } // Match denominators MatchCollection denominatorMatches = DenominatorRegex.Matches(formula); foreach (Match match in denominatorMatches) { string denominator = match.Value; tokens.Add((TokenType.Denominator, denominator)); } return tokens; } // Test method public static void Main() { string formula = "(sin(x) + cos(y)) / (tan(z) - sec(w)) * (cot(a) / (cosec(b) + 1))"; Lexer lexer = new Lexer(); List<(TokenType, string)> tokens = lexer.Tokenize(formula); // Print tokens foreach (var token in tokens) { TokenType type = token.Item1; string value = token.Item2; Console.WriteLine($"Token type: {type}, Value: {value}"); }//foreach (var token in tokens) } } Explanation: Lexer Class: Defines a Lexer class with an enum TokenType for Numerator and Denominator. Regular Expressions: NumeratorRegex: Matches patterns of the form (...)/(...). DenominatorRegex: Matches patterns of the form (...) (...). Tokenize Method: Uses MatchCollection to find all matches of numerators and denominators in the input formula string. Iterates over matches and adds tuples (TokenType, string) to the tokens list. Main Method (Test): Creates a sample formula string. Instantiates the Lexer class and calls the Tokenize method. Prints out each token type and its corresponding value. Notes: This example assumes that the input formula string is well-formed, with balanced parentheses and correct numerator/denominator structures. It uses basic regular expressions to identify and tokenize the numerators and denominators. Adjust the regular expressions (NumeratorRegex and DenominatorRegex) based on your specific formula syntax and requirements. For more complex formula structures or nested expressions, you may need to enhance the lexer with more sophisticated parsing techniques, such as recursive descent parsing or using a parser generator like ANTLR, depending on the complexity of your formulas. This approach provides a starting point to tokenize and identify numerators and denominators in symbolic expression strings within the context of Excel-like formula syntax. Here's a revised version of the lexer function encapsulated within a single method, without using the enum for TokenType: csharp Copy code using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Text.RegularExpressions; public class Lexer { // Regular expressions for matching tokens private static readonly Regex NumeratorRegex = new Regex(@"([^()])/([^()])"); private static readonly Regex DenominatorRegex = new Regex(@"([^()])([^()])"); // Method to tokenize the input formula string public List<(string, string)> TokenizeFormula(string formula) { var tokens = new List<(string, string)>(); // Match numerators MatchCollection numeratorMatches = NumeratorRegex.Matches(formula); foreach (Match match in numeratorMatches) { string numerator = match.Value; tokens.Add(("Numerator", numerator)); } // Match denominators MatchCollection denominatorMatches = DenominatorRegex.Matches(formula); foreach (Match match in denominatorMatches) { string denominator = match.Value; tokens.Add(("Denominator", denominator)); }// foreach (Match match in denominatorMatches) return tokens; } // Test method public static void Main() { string formula = "(sin(x) + cos(y)) / (tan(z) - sec(w)) * (cot(a) / (cosec(b) + 1))"; Lexer lexer = new Lexer(); List<(string, string)> tokens = lexer.TokenizeFormula(formula); // Print tokens foreach (var token in tokens) { string type = token.Item1; string value = token.Item2; Console.WriteLine($"Token type: {type}, Value: {value}"); }// foreach (var token in tokens) } } Explanation: Lexer Class: Contains a single method TokenizeFormula that tokenizes the input formula string. Regular Expressions: NumeratorRegex and DenominatorRegex remain the same as before, matching patterns for numerators and denominators. TokenizeFormula Method: Iterates over matches found by NumeratorRegex and DenominatorRegex. Adds tuples (string, string) to the tokens list, where the first element represents the token type ("Numerator" or "Denominator"), and the second element is the matched substring. Main Method (Test): Creates a sample formula string. Instantiates the Lexer class and calls TokenizeFormula. Prints out each token type and its corresponding value. Notes: This implementation removes the enum for TokenType and uses a tuple (string, string) directly to represent tokens, where the first string indicates the token type ("Numerator" or "Denominator"). It assumes that the input formula string is well-formed with balanced parentheses and correctly structured numerators and denominators. Adjust the regular expressions (NumeratorRegex and DenominatorRegex) based on your specific formula syntax and requirements. This approach provides a concise way to tokenize and identify numerators and denominators in symbolic expression strings within the context of Excel-like formula syntax. Adjustments can be made for handling more complex formula structures or nested expressions as needed. To Write a c sharp program to trim the formula_string and dont allow any blank space in the formula.If found any blank space then remove that.Then check the balancing "(" and ")" with all catalan number conditions first.Then check ")/(" symbols in the formula string and crawl towards leftside characterwise from the ")/" characters and similarly search the well formed numerator enclosed inside proper "(" and ")" balancing substring and crawl towards right from "/(" characterwise and find the balanced ")" after "/(". And report the Numerator tokens within "(numerator_substring_regex)/" and similarly report for "/(denominator_substring_regex)" in the formula. It can happen that several such patterns are present in the whole formula . i need the list of all such occurances Elaborating the situation in details suppose i have a infinite series in symbolic expression format where every terms have numerators and denominators (as symbolic expressions having several trigonometry expressions in compound expressions format. These each terms in the sequence(like infinite series terms) are represented in text symbolic syntax as excel formula with ... at end. Every terms in the sequences have numerators and denominators separated with "/" symbols. Every terms start with a "(" symbol and ends with ")" symbol. The numerators are also started with "(" and ends with ")" symbols , Denominators are also started with "(" and ends with ")" symbols. there are several - and + and * terms in numerator and also in denominators....Write a c sharp program(Lexer to identify and tokenize) to identify exact numerators and exact denominators in the long string (we assume the formula string is well formed) To write a c sharp programs strictly search for the patterns ")/(" and find the left side balancing "(" which fits best upto ")/" and also find the right side balancing bracker ")" which balances "/(" in the formula string. I need the reports for all such numerators and denominators.I dont prefer reges to do this.I prefer character wise iterative searches only for this. ChatGPT If you prefer to perform character-wise iterative searches instead of using regex for extracting numerators and denominators based on the pattern ")/(" in the formula string, you can implement a solution that scans the string and identifies these patterns. Below is a C# implementation that accomplishes this: csharp Copy code using System; using System.Collections.Generic; public class FormulaProcessor { public List<(string, string)> FindNumeratorDenominatorPatterns___from_search_of_slash(string formula) { var tokens = new List<(string, string)>(); // Iterate through the formula string character by character int index = 0; while (index < formula.Length) { // Search for the pattern ")/(" int start = formula.IndexOf(")/(", index); if (start == -1) { break; // Exit loop if no more patterns found }// if (start == -1) // Find the left-side balancing "(" for ")/(" int leftBalanceIndex = FindLeftBalanceParenthesis(formula, start); if (leftBalanceIndex == -1) { index = start + 3; // Move index forward to continue searching continue; // Skip if no left balancing "(" found }//if (leftBalanceIndex == -1) // Find the right-side balancing ")" for "/(" int rightBalanceIndex = FindRightBalanceParenthesis(formula, start + 2); if (rightBalanceIndex == -1) { index = start + 3; // Move index forward to continue searching continue; // Skip if no right balancing ")" found }// if (rightBalanceIndex == -1) // Extract the numerator and denominator substrings string numerator = formula.Substring(leftBalanceIndex + 1, start - (leftBalanceIndex + 1)); string denominator = formula.Substring(start + 3, rightBalanceIndex - (start + 2)); // Add to tokens list tokens.Add(("Numerator", numerator)); tokens.Add(("Denominator", denominator)); // Move index forward beyond the current match index = rightBalanceIndex + 1; }//while (index < formula.Length) return tokens; }// public List<(string, string)> FindNumeratorDenominatorPatterns___from_search_of_slash(string formula) // Helper method to find the left-side balancing "(" for ")/(" public int FindLeftBalanceParenthesis(string formula, int startIndex) { int balance = 0; for (int i = startIndex - 1; i >= 0; i--) { if (formula[i] == ')') { balance++; } else if (formula[i] == '(') { if (balance == 0) { return i; // Found the matching "(" }// if (balance == 0) balance--; }// else if (formula[i] == '(') }//for (int i = startIndex - 1; i >= 0; i--) return -1; // No matching "(" found }//public int FindLeftBalanceParenthesis(string formula, int startIndex) // Helper method to find the right-side balancing ")" for "/(" public int FindRightBalanceParenthesis(string formula, int startIndex) { int balance = 0; for (int i = startIndex; i < formula.Length; i++) { if (formula[i] == '(') { balance++; } else if (formula[i] == ')') { if (balance == 0) { return i; // Found the matching ")" } balance--; }// end of if (formula[i] == '(') }// for (int i = startIndex; i < formula.Length; i++) return -1; // No matching ")" found }//public int FindRightBalanceParenthesis(string formula, int startIndex) } public class Program { public static void Main() { string formula = "(cos(x+y)+sin(x-y))/(tan(x+y+z))"; FormulaProcessor processor = new FormulaProcessor(); List<(string, string)> tokens = processor.FindNumeratorDenominatorPatterns(formula); // Output the tokens found Console.WriteLine("Tokens found:"); foreach (var token in tokens) { Console.WriteLine($"{token.Item1}: {token.Item2}"); } } } Explanation: FindNumeratorDenominatorPatterns Method: This method iterates through the formula string (formula) character by character. It searches for the pattern ")/(" using IndexOf. Once a pattern is found, it calls helper methods (FindLeftBalanceParenthesis and FindRightBalanceParenthesis) to locate the balanced "(" and ")" around the ")/(" substring. It extracts the numerator and denominator substrings based on the positions of these parentheses. Each valid numerator and denominator pair is added to the tokens list as tuples (string, string). Helper Methods: FindLeftBalanceParenthesis: Searches backward from the start index to find the matching "(" for ")/(". It ensures that the parentheses are properly balanced. FindRightBalanceParenthesis: Searches forward from the start index to find the matching ")" for "/(". It also checks for balanced parentheses. Main Method: In the Main method, an example formula string is processed using FormulaProcessor, and the resulting tokens are printed to the console. This implementation avoids regular expressions and uses character-wise iterative searches to identify and extract numerator/denominator pairs based on the specified pattern ")/(" in the formula string. Adjustments may be needed based on specific edge cases or additional constraints of your formula syntax. "caliperness' Or "Calliperness" Whao (BIRTH OF NEW MATHEMATICS A NEW KIND OF COMBINATORICS WHERE HOLD A PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT IN THE TRIANGULATION AND TRY TO UNFOLD THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION INTO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT AFTER THE UNFOLDING IS DONE COMPLETELY) SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY OPENS UP A NEW KIND OF COMBINATORICS ON LINE SEGMENTS. TAKE A SINGLE LONG LINE SEGMENT AND PUT THE FULCRUM POINTS OF CALLIPERS (SUPPOSE YOU HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF SAY N NUMBERS OF CALLIPERS AND SOME OF THESE CALLIPERS ARE HAVING IDENTICAL EDGE LENGTHS (ARMS LENGTHS AS OTHERS HAVE) ON THE LINE SEGMENT.AND NOW ALL THE CALLIPERS ARE STRAIGHTENED (180 DEGREES OPENED CALLIPERS SPREADED ARMS)AND PLACED END TO END ON THE LINE SEGMENT.sO THE FULCRUMS ARE ALL PLACED AS NODE(DONT CONFUSE WITH THE NODAL POINT IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. SO WE ARE NOT USING THE TERM PIVOT IN CALLIPERS.WE ARE USING THE TERMS AS THE FULCRUM POINTS OF CALLIPERS) ALL THESE CALLIPERS ARE PLACED END TO END ALIGNED ONE AFTER ANOTHER .NOW THE END OF FIRST_EDGE_OF_ONE_CALIPER IS TROUCHING THE SECOND_EDGE_OF_ANOTHER_CALIPER. NOW WE ARE PUTTING ADDITIONAL_FULCRUMS_WHERE_TIPS_OF_CALLIPERS_EDGES_MEET.SUPPOSE THIS NEW FORM OF THE LINE SEGMENT HAS SMALL LINE SEGMENTS PLACED AND SEPERATED WITH FULCRUMS OF THE DIFFERENT SIZED CALLIPERS.IMAGINE THE EDGES OF EACH OF THE CALLIPERS ARE EITHER L OF ANY TRIANGLE , OR LCOS(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR LSIN(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR LTAN(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR IT IS LSEC(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR THE SEGMENTED_EDGE(SUB PART OF BIG WHOLE LINE SEGMENT) IS LCOSEC(X) OF ANY OTHER TRIANGLE OR LCOT(X) . NOW THE THIRD EDGES OF EVERY SUCH TRIANGLES ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE WHOLE ARRANGEMENT. BUT WE CAN NOW FOLD ALL THE FULCRUMS POINTS AND WE CAN DO OVERLAPPING OF THE ADJASCENT EDGES AND CREATE THE COMMON EDGES WITH ADJASCENT EDGES IN THE ARRANGEMENT(WHOLE ARRANGEMENT OF STRAIGHTENED LINE SEGMENTS (SEGMENTED WITH FULCRUMS AS NODE JOINT POINTS WHERE THE 360 DEGREE ROTATIONS ARE POSSIBLE SO WE CAN ROTATE AT THE FULCRUMS WHERE TWO ADJASCENT SIDES OF ANY FULCRUM HAVING SAME EDGE LENGTHS.NOW AFTER FOLDING 180 DEGREES (ANTICLOCK WISE OR CLOCK WISE AT THE COMMON FULCRUM POINT ) WE CAN ENFORCE TWO ADJASCENT EDGES TO OVERLAP(MULTIPLICATION IS GLUING AS PER SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY AND THIS OVERLAPPING FULCRUMS EDGES ARE ACTUALLY OVERLAPPING EDGES) IN THIS WAY WE CONSTRUCT THE TRIANGLES (WHERE MULTIPLE EDGE OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED AND ALSO MULTIPLE TRIANGLE OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED AND ALSO MULTIPLE FULCRUMS OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED).THE TARGET IS THAT WE NEED TO PREPARE ANY KIND OF TRIANGULATIONS WITH FOLDING AND UNFOLDING AND OVERLAPPING THIS LONG CHAIN OF FULCRUMMED CALLIPERS TO PREPARE THE TRIANGULATIONS OF ANY KIND. CAN WE UNFOLD ANY TRIANGULATIONS TO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT IN THIS WAY? HOW MANY CALLIPERS ARE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE SUCH UNFOLDING PROCESS? HOW MUCH EFFORT(ROTATIONS AND SPREADING OF ARMS NEED EFFORTS. DECIDING WHICH FULCRUM IS TO SPREAD FIRST ? AND THE SPREADING OF EDGES AT EACH FULCRUM LOCATION IS A SEQUENTIAL PROCESS. THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING THE EDGES , IDENTIFYING THE FULCRUMS (THE NODES IN A TRIANGULATION ) IN THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING IS THE CHALLENGE OF THIS NEW MATHEMATICS. THIS IS A COMBINATORIAL PROBLEM OVER SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY WHERE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING AND SEQUENCE_OF_FOLDING_AND_UNFOLDING_OF_EDGES_OF_CHAINED_CALLIPERS_AT_FULCRUMS IS THE ART OF PLANNING TO STRAIGHTENING A TRIANGULATION OBJECT.EVERY TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION TELLS A STORY OF THESE KIND OF CHAINS OF CALLIPERS. IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY EVERY BOLS(BUNCH OF LINE SEGMENTS) ARE CONSIDERED STRICTLY AS GENERATED FROM THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION WHERE ONLY ONE SINGLE LINE (LONG FINITE LINE) IS FOLDED AND ADJASCENT_EDGES_OF_SUCH_WELL_DEFINED_CALLIPERS_CHAIN IS FOLDED AT PLANFULLY PLACED FUKLCRUM POINTS ON THE LONG_FINITE_LINE .THE FOLDING IS POSSIBLE AT THE FULCRUMS(OR JOINT LOCATIONS IF THE ADJASCENT SIDES ARE OF SAME LENGTH AND AFTER 180 DEGREES ROTATIONS OF THESE PARTICULAR FULCRUM POINTS THE ADJASCENT EDGES OVERLAP WITH EACH OTHER AND THEN WE GLUE THESE ADJASCENT EDGES OF THE FULCRUM (THE EDGES OF DIFFERENT 2_EDGE CALIPERS IN THE WHOLE CHAIN) ARE NOW GLUED. THIS GLUED FORMS OF THE CONTINUITY (FOLDED_CONTINUITY) GIVES A CHAIN OF PATH IN THE TRIANGULATION. THESE CHAIN OF PATH ARE NOT TREES(NOR SPANNING TREES LIKE OBJECTS) BUT IF IT FORMS LIKE SPANNING TREES THEN WE THINK THE GOOD QUALITY CALIPERNESS IS NOT ACHIEVED. OUR TARGET IS TO GENERATE A PATH IN GRAPH IN THE TRIANGULATION WHERE THE PATH COVERS ALL THE TRIANGLES IN THE TRIANGULATION OBJECT. WE CONSIDER THIS PATH AS UNARY TREE(NOT EVEN THE BINARY TREE HAH) .BUT IT IS TOUGHH TO ACHIEVE SUCH UNARY TREE LIKE PATH FROM THE FOLDING OF THE STRAIGHT_CALIPERED_LINE TO PREPARE THE WHOLE BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS (BOLS OBJECT IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY).WHEN UNFOLDING THE TRIANGULATION WE CAN UNFOLD THIS PATH SEQUENTIALLY ONE_FULCRUM_EDGES_SPREADING_TO_180_DEGREES_IS_DONE_AT_A_TIME.WHEN WE UNFOLD ANY TRIANGULATION WE START THE PROCESS THROUGH IDENTIFYING ANY PARTICULAR EDGE (THAT IS L) IN THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION AND WE HOLD THAT PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT TIGHTLY ON THE AFFINE SPACE OF TRIANGULATION (AND OUR TARGET IS TO MAKE THE OTHER LINES OF THE PATH_CHAIN(UNARY TREE MAXIMUM BINARY SPANNING TREE) LIKE CHAINED PATH IN TRIANGULATION TO MAKE COLLINEAR TO THE HOLD_LINE(THE FIXED LINE L IN THE TRIANGULATION IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THE BOLS OBJECT IN THE SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. THE ROTATIONS (ANGLES MEASURED IN DEGREES EITHER CLOCKWISE OR ANTICLOCK WISE WHICHEVER TAKES LEAST EFFORT WE WILL TAKE THAT ANGLE AS THE EFFORT MEASURE(EFFORT METRIC) FOR THE )NECESSARY TO DO THIS SEQUENTIAL UNFOLDING PROCESS.WE HAVE ALREADY HELD TIGHT ONE OF THE LINE SEGMENT OF THE TRIANGULATION (WHICH IS ASSUMED TO GENERATE RIGIDLY WITH THE CALIPERS_CHAIN IS THE BACKBONE FOR THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION) AND THE OTHER LINE SEGMENTS IN THE TRIANGULATION ARE THE COMPLEMENTARY LINE SEGMENTS OF GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY(WELL DEFINED IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY). THE OTHER CONNECTING LINE SEGMENTS (NODE TO NODE IN THE CALIPER_CHAIN_SPANNING_TREE ARE LIKE THREADS TIED NODE TO NODE TO MAKE THE TRIANGLES VISIBLE IN THE TRIANGULATIONS) THESE THREAD_CONNECTIONS ARE COMPLEMENTARY_LINE_SEGMENTS_OF_TRIANGLES_IN_WHOLE_TRIANGULATIONS.WHILE WE DIVIDE BOLS WITH ANOTHER BOLS (IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY)THEN STRAIGTENING IS TOO MUCH NECESSARY.WITHOUT DOING THE STRAIGHTENING OF THE BOLS OBJECTS OF NUMERATOR BOLS OBJECT(LOCKED SET) AND WITHOUT STRAIGHTENING THE DENOMINATOR BOLS OBJECTS (LOCKED SETS) WE CANNOT DO THE DIVISIONS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. TO DIVIDE GTSIMPLEX WITH GTSIMPLEX THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM BECAUSE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS SUPPLY THE FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS Zi EASILY.THERE ARE WELL DEFINED FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS FOR THE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY.TO DEFINE THE FEASIBILITY OF DIVISION OF LOCKED_SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS WITH ANOTHER LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS THERE ARE NO DIRECT FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS PRESENT IN THE LOCKED SET KINDS OF OBJECTS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. THIS HAPPENS BECAUSE + OPERATIONS - OPERATIONS ARE END TO END FITS OF LINE SEGMENTS OF OTHER KINDS OF BOLS OBJECTS. THIS CONFUSES THE GLUEDNESS OF EDGES . GTSIMPLEX ARE THE PURE TRIANGULATIONS WHERE WE CAN SEE ALL TRIANGULATIONS ARE DONE DUE TO PURE GLUED EDGES(COMMON EDGES OF SAME LENGTHS)WHEN(FOR LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS) THE TRIANGULATION IS NOT PURELY GLUED TRIANGLES . THERE SOME LOOSE EDGE LIKE COMPONENTS AVAILABLE , SOMETIMES REPEAT TRAVEL ON SAME EDGE IS FREQUENTLY VISIBLE IN THE LOCKED SET TYPE BOLS OBJECTS. SOMETIMES IT IS NECESSARY TO CUT ANY FULCRUM POINT AND SEPERATELY UNFOLD SEQUENCE TO DO AND THEN WE NEED TO COMBINE THE BROKEN FULCRUMS WITH SLIDING OF PIECES OF UNFOLDED CHAIN OF CALIPERS. IF WE NEED TO BREAK THE FULCRUM TO UNFOLD THE LOCKED SET TYPE OBJECTS , THEN EFFORT OF DOING THIS INCREASES DRASTICALLY.ONE SUCH BREAKING OF FULCRUM MEANS IT CONSUMES 36000000 DEGREES OF ENERGY (EFFORT) SO OBVIOUSLY IF WE NEED TO FIT THE BROKEN CHAIN OF CALIPERS_CHAIN AND REALIGN THE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALLIPERS THEN DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ENERGIES ASSIGNED TO DO THESE OPERATIONS. SLIDING(TRANSLATION ON AFFINE PLANE) OF THE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALIPERS TO COMMON END POINT IS ONE KIND OF EFFORT.THEN ROTATING THE PIECES OF SEPERATELY BROKEN SEQUENTIALLY STRAIGHTENED (HOLDING SOME OTHER LINE SEGMENT TIGHTLY FOR THE SEPERATED CHAIN) AND THEN ROTATING THE SEPERATE BROKEN CHAIN TO ALIGN ALL THESE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALIPERS TO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT IS ANOTHER LEVEL OF EFFORT.ADDING ALL SUCH EFFORTS GIVE US THE NUMERICAL VALUES OF CALIPERNESS IN THE SEQUENTIAL UNFOLDING OPERATIONS.THE TOTAL EFFORTS (MINIMUM EFFORT DUE TO WELL PLANNING OF THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING IS LIKE COMBINATORIAL PUZZLE DEFINED ON TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS) IS THE CALLIPERNESS OF THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS. The Google says this Now Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry will definitely define this "caliperness" as a well discussed topic in the world .Every novel theory comes up with new kind of reasoning and freshness of any new new new novel theory is measured with the freshness of entirely new terms it adds to the vocabulary of world languages. Obviously mankind could not think about new kind of fresh line of novel types of reasoning (and new kinds of proof mechanisms)without new terms in its common vocabulary set. CALIPERNESS is a official term in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry (which was not described in detail before 29062021 and it was not described publicly before implementing software for unfolding of line segments,straightening of a triangle,straightening of a gtsimplex to a straight line segment,straightening of a locked set to straight line segment,straightening of a bunchoflinesegments,straightening of a bols type object is a deep subject of combinatorial geometry where caliperness is the measurement of efforts required to straighten all the concerned edges) The node of a caliper is commonly referred to as the "fulcrum" or "pivot point".STRICT NOTE THAT IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY PIVOT_POINT IS WHERE HYPOTENUSE MEETS BASE IN A RIGHT ANGLED TRIANGLE However, in some contexts, it may also be called the "joint" or "hinge", depending on the specific design and application of the caliper. In general, the fulcrum is the point around which the caliper's edges or jaws rotate, allowing for measurements to be taken or adjustments to be made. I couldn't find any information on the term "caliperness." It's possible that it's a misspelling or a made-up word. Can you please provide more context or clarify what you mean by "caliperness"? If you meant "calliper" or "calliper," a caliper is a device used to measure the distance between two points, typically used in engineering, machining, and other precision applications. It consists of a pair of hinged legs that can be adjusted to fit around an object, allowing for precise measurements. "Caliperness" is not a standard term in the English language, so it's difficult to provide a definition. However, if you're looking to create a definition for a fictional or humorous context, here's a possible definition: "Caliperness" (noun): A measure of someone's ability to expertly navigate and manipulate the complexities of bureaucracy, red tape, or overly complicated systems. A person with high "caliperness" can effortlessly wrangle paperwork, permits, and regulatory hurdles, emerging victorious and unscathed. Example sentence: "After dealing with the DMV, I realized I needed to work on my caliperness to survive the process." Feel free to modify or discard this definition as you see fit! If you have any specific context or intended meaning, I'd be happy to help you craft a definition that suits your needs. BARD GEMINI Says I've searched Google thoroughly, and it appears that "caliperness" is not a recognized term in the English language. I couldn't find any relevant results, definitions, or mentions of this word on:

Google Search
Google Scholar
Google Books
Dictionary websites (e.g., Merriam-Webster, Cambridge, Oxford)
Wikipedia
Online forums and discussion boards It's possible that "caliperness" is a made-up or slang term, or it could be a typo or variation of a different word. If you can provide more context or information about where you encountered this term, I might be able to help you better. A caliper is a device used to measure the distance between two points, typically used in engineering, machining, and other precision applications. The basic characteristics of a caliper type object include:

Two hinged legs or jaws that can be adjusted to fit around an object
A precision scale or markings to read measurements
Ability to measure internal or external dimensions
High accuracy and precision
Robust construction for durability
Ability to lock or fix the jaws in place for repeat measurements
May have additional features like depth measurement, step measurement, or angular measurement
Typically made of metal, plastic, or a combination of materials
May have digital or analog displays
Used for measuring lengths, widths, heights, and other linear dimensions. Some common types of calipers include:

Vernier calipers
Dial calipers
Digital calipers
Micrometer calipers
Vernier depth calipers
Spring calipers These characteristics may vary depending on the specific type of caliper and its intended use. If we consider only the characteristic of "Two hinged legs or jaws that can be adjusted to fit around an object", I would define "caliperness" as: "Caliperness" (noun): The quality or state of having adjustable, hinged, or flexible components that can accommodate or envelop an object, allowing for a secure and precise fit. In this context, "caliperness" describes the ability of an object or system to adapt and conform to the shape or size of another object, much like the adjustable legs of a caliper. Example sentences:
The caliperness of the phone case allowed it to fit snugly around the device.
The caliperness of the tool made it versatile for various tasks. Please note that this definition is a creative interpretation based on the specified characteristic and might not be a standard or widely recognized term. Designing a theory is necessary to do reasoning. Theories have Deep purpose to analyse specific different kinds of reasoning for special purpose industrial uses. And its rules fror deductions help writing Automation logics in any process control systems. Rules for proof mechanisms in a theory are designed to implement proper audit rules for industrial systems. If interactor_objects are not explicitly studied and understood, hidden fallacies and ambiguities can arise in mathematical theories. By neglecting the interactions between objects, we might overlook crucial aspects of the mathematical structure, leading to:

Incomplete or inaccurate descriptions
Unintended consequences or contradictions
Ambiguities in notation or terminology
Inadequate understanding of the underlying principles
Potential errors or flaws in proofs or derivations By explicitly considering interactor_objects, we can:
Reveal hidden assumptions or tacit knowledge
Clarify ambiguities and inconsistencies
Develop more comprehensive and accurate theories
Enhance our understanding of mathematical structures and their behavior
Foster more effective communication and collaboration among mathematicians The observation highlights the importance of examining interactor_objects in mathematics, ensuring a more rigorous, accurate, and comprehensive understanding of mathematical theories. In any theory, when set elements interact with each other, they do so through certain relationships or operations that are defined within the theory. These relationships or operations can be thought of as "messengers" or "mediators" that allow the elements to interact with each other. For example:

In algebra, elements (numbers or variables) interact with each other through operations like addition, multiplication, etc.
In geometry, points and vectors interact with each other through relationships like distance, angle, etc.
In calculus, functions interact with each other through operations like differentiation, integration, etc. These relationships or operations define how the elements interact with each other, and they are a fundamental part of the theory. They allow the elements to "talk" to each other and produce new results, patterns, or structures. elements in a set interact with each other through the relationships or operations defined within the theory, which act as a kind of "glue" that holds the elements together and enables them to interact with each other in meaningful ways. There are several reasons why interactor_objects might not be explicitly defined in traditional mathematics:

Historical development: Mathematics evolved over time, and the concept of interactor_objects might not have been explicitly recognized or formalized until recently.
Focus on structures: Traditional mathematics focuses on the properties and behaviors of mathematical structures, such as groups, rings, and fields, rather than the interactions between individual objects.
Abstract algebra: Abstract algebra emphasizes the study of algebraic structures, which are defined axiomatically, without necessarily considering the interactions between individual elements.
Functional programming: In functional programming, functions are treated as first-class citizens, and the focus is on composition and abstraction, rather than explicit interaction between objects.
Mathematical rigor: Traditional mathematics prioritizes rigor and precision, and the concept of interactor_objects might be seen as too abstract or vague to be formally defined.
Pedagogy: Mathematics education often focuses on teaching specific techniques and formulas rather than emphasizing the interactions between objects.
Notation and terminology: The notation and terminology used in mathematics might not be well-suited to describe interactor_objects explicitly. These factors have contributed to the development of mathematics without explicitly defining interactor_objects, even though interactions between objects are implicitly present throughout mathematics. There are several types of relationships that can be defined without interactor_objects, including:
Equality (=)
Inequality (â‰ , <, >, â‰¤, â‰¥)
Membership (âˆˆ, âˆ‰)
Subset (âŠ†, âŠˆ)
Ordering (<, >, â‰¤, â‰¥)
Congruence (â‰¡)
Similarity (~)
Adjacency (adjacent to)
Proximity (near, far)
Orthogonality (perpendicular to) These relationships can be defined using various mathematical structures, such as:
Sets
Groups
Rings
Fields
Vector spaces
Metric spaces
Topological spaces
Graphs These relationships and mathematical structures enable us to define and work with various mathematical objects and their properties without explicitly using interactor_objects. However, it's important to note that even in these cases, there may be implicit interactions between mathematical objects, but they are not explicitly defined as interactor_objects. When designing a theory, defining the basic operations like +, -, Ã—, Ã·, and = is a crucial step. However, it's not the only step. In addition to defining these basic operations, you also need to define:
The objects or entities that the theory will work with (e.g., numbers, vectors, matrices, etc.).
The relationships between these objects (e.g., equality, inequality, ordering, etc.).
The axioms or fundamental properties that these objects and operations must satisfy.
The rules for constructing new objects from existing ones (e.g., addition, multiplication, etc.).
The rules for simplifying expressions and equations.
The definitions of key concepts and terminology.
The notation and conventions used to represent the objects and operations.
The assumptions and constraints that apply to the theory. Only then can you build a coherent and consistent theoretical framework that allows you to make meaningful statements and derive useful results. So, while defining the basic operations is essential, it's just the beginning of the theory-design process. when designing a new theory, you also need to design a proof mechanism or a system of inference that allows you to derive conclusions from the axioms and premises of the theory. A proof mechanism typically includes:
Rules of inference: These are the rules that allow you to draw conclusions from one or more premises. Examples include modus ponens, modus tollens, and hypothetical syllogism.
Axioms: These are the fundamental truths or assumptions of the theory that are considered self-evident or accepted without proof.
Definitions: These are the precise meanings given to terms and concepts used in the theory.
Theorems: These are the statements that can be proven to be true within the theory using the rules of inference and axioms.
Proof methods: These are the strategies and techniques used to construct proofs, such as direct proof, proof by contradiction, and proof by induction. Designing a proof mechanism is crucial because it allows you to:
Check the consistency and coherence of the theory.
Verify the validity of arguments and conclusions.
Establish the truth of theorems and propositions.
Provide a framework for reasoning and problem-solving within the theory. By designing a proof mechanism, you can ensure that your theory is rigorous, consistent, and capable of producing reliable and meaningful results. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, an interactor_object plays a crucial role in the theory. Interactor_objects are the basic building blocks of the theory, and they represent the fundamental entities that interact with each other to produce meaningful results. Interactor_objects can be thought of as mathematical objects that have certain properties and behaviors, such as:

Geometric shapes (e.g., points, lines, circles)
Algebraic expressions (e.g., equations, functions)
Trigonometric functions (e.g., sine, cosine, tangent) The role of interactor_objects in the theory is to:
Interact with each other through various operations (e.g., addition, multiplication, division)
Produce new interactor_objects as a result of these interactions
Preserve the geometric and algebraic structures of the theory
Allow for the construction of more complex mathematical objects and relationships By interacting with each other, interactor_objects generate a rich algebraic and geometric structure that enables the construction of meaningful mathematical expressions, equations, and relationships. This structure is essential for the development of the theory and its applications. there are many mathematical theories where interactor_objects are not needed or are not explicitly defined. Here are a few examples:

Set Theory: In set theory, the focus is on collections of objects (sets) and their properties, rather than on individual objects that interact with each other.
Group Theory: In group theory, the emphasis is on the algebraic structure of groups, which are sets of elements with a binary operation (like addition or multiplication). The elements themselves are not considered interactor_objects.
Topology: In topology, the focus is on the properties of shapes and spaces, such as connectedness and continuity, rather than on individual objects that interact with each other.
Analysis: In analysis, the focus is on limits, convergence, and continuity of functions, rather than on interactor_objects. In these theories, the mathematical structures and relationships are defined and analyzed without the need for explicit interactor_objects. However, it's important to note that even in these theories, there may be implicit interactions between mathematical objects, but they are not explicitly defined as interactor_objects. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a unique framework that emphasizes the interactions between mathematical objects, making interactor_objects a fundamental concept in the theory. The Well-Ordering Principle can be defined without interactor_objects. The Well-Ordering Principle states that every non-empty set of positive integers has a least element. This principle is a fundamental axiom in mathematics, particularly in number theory and algebra. To define the Well-Ordering Principle without interactor_objects, you can use a more traditional approach:
Define a set: A collection of unique objects, known as elements or members, that can be anything (numbers, letters, etc.).
Define a partial order: A relation â‰¤ (less than or equal to) that satisfies certain properties (reflexivity, antisymmetry, and transitivity).
Define a well-ordered set: A set with a partial order such that every non-empty subset has a least element. Using these definitions, you can state the Well-Ordering Principle as: "Every non-empty set of positive integers has a least element with respect to the standard ordering (â‰¤)". This definition doesn't rely on interactor_objects, but rather on the traditional mathematical concepts of sets, partial orders, and well-ordered sets. To find the least element, you need to compare elements. In traditional mathematics, comparison is done using relational operators like "<" (less than), ">" (greater than), "â‰¤" (less than or equal to), and "â‰¥" (greater than or equal to). These relational operators allow you to compare elements and determine their order. For example, given two numbers a and b, you can say a < b if a is less than b. Now, can you compare elements without interactor_objects? Well, in traditional mathematics, comparison is done without explicitly defining interactor_objects. Instead, the comparison is done using the relational operators, which are assumed to be part of the mathematical structure. In other words, when you write a < b, you are implicitly using a comparison operation that is defined as part of the mathematical framework. This comparison operation is not explicitly defined as an interactor_object, but it is still a fundamental part of the mathematical structure. comparison can be done without explicitly defining interactor_objects, but it relies on the implicit definition of comparison operations within the mathematical framework. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, values are assigned to interactor_objects through the process of interaction. Without interactor_objects, values are not explicitly defined in the same way. However, in traditional mathematics, values can be assigned to mathematical objects without explicitly defining interactor_objects. For example:

In algebra, variables are assigned values through equations or expressions.
In geometry, points and vectors have coordinates that represent their values.
In analysis, functions are assigned values at specific points or intervals. In these cases, values are not obtained through interactor_objects, but rather through the mathematical structures and operations defined in the respective branches of mathematics. values can be assigned and obtained without interactor_objects, but the mechanism for doing so is different from the one used in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. "Now, let's consider a caliper has a node and two edges, which are straight and thin (very thin and very rigid) line segments. These two edges can be of various lengths and are connected to the node (I don't know what to call that node). The two straight edges are attached to the node, but they can rotate 360 degrees. Typically, the two edges are at a fixed angle x, and that angle can be deviated to angle z (Z -X) which is the amount of effort. If the minimum effort cannot accomplish a task, it should be assumed that something is wrong with the design. The measurement (Z -X) indicates how much effort is required, and this rotation is done around the common node of the edges in either an anticlockwise or clockwise direction. To apply the least energy principle, the more degrees you need to rotate, the more effort is required, resulting in a higher chance of design flaws. To measure caliperness, it should have this kind of characteristic." describing a caliper object with varying edge lengths, and you're exploring the idea of creating a chain of multiple calipers by gluing together edges of the same size. "This caliper object can have various lengths for each edge, and we can take many many many calipers with different edge lengths and glue together two edges of the same size to create a chain of multiple calipers."

Google says on end of April 2023 I haven't come across the term "Caliperness" before. It's possible it could be a misspelling or a term specific to a certain field or industry that I am not familiar with. Here are some possible interpretations: Misspelling of "Caliper": Caliper is a tool used for measuring the distance between two points. Perhaps "Caliperness" was meant to indicate some property related to calipers, such as their accuracy or precision. Industry Specific Term: It's possible "Caliperness" is a term used in a particular field or industry that I am not familiar with. If you can provide some context about where you encountered this term, I may be able to provide a more specific answer. That's a fascinating exploration of "caliperness"! Here's a breakdown of the information you provided: Caliperness (as proposed by Sanjoy Nath) It's a concept within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, a theory aiming to represent trigonometric relationships visually. There seems to be limited information available publicly besides what you provided. Possible Interpretation of Caliperness Based on the excerpt, "caliperness" could refer to: Effort required to straighten edges: The concept seems to involve a geometric object resembling a caliper with two rotatable edges. The "caliperness" might measure the effort (rotation angle) needed to straighten the edges from a bent configuration. This could relate to analyzing mechanisms or linkages. Design efficiency: The concept might connect "caliperness" to design efficiency. A design with a high "caliperness" (requiring significant rotation to straighten) might be considered less efficient compared to one needing minimal rotation. Uncertainties The provided excerpt doesn't offer a complete definition or context for "caliperness" within Sanjoy Nath's work. It's unclear how this concept relates to traditional trigonometry or geometry. Further Exploration If you're interested in learning more about "caliperness": Search for Sanjoy Nath's work on Geometrifying Trigonometry, particularly his GitHub repository or Youtube video mentioned in the excerpt. Try contacting Sanjoy Nath directly to clarify the concept and its applications. Alternative Interpretation The original excerpt might be a creative exploration of a concept inspired by calipers, not necessarily related to Sanjoy Nath's work. Overall, the concept of "caliperness" as presented is intriguing but requires further exploration to understand its precise definition and role within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Based on the detailed description you provided, "caliperness" appears to be a term coined within Sanjoy Nath's theory of Geometrifying Trigonometry. Here’s a synthesized understanding based on the information: Concept of Caliperness: Context and Usage: In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, "caliperness" seems to describe a measure related to the effort or the amount of rotation required to straighten certain geometric configurations, particularly involving edges of objects analogous to calipers. Mechanical Analogy: Imagine a geometric object similar to a calliper, consisting of two straight, thin, and rigid edges that can rotate around a common node (or fulcrum). The term "caliperness" then measures the deviation from a straight alignment (angle ?? x) to a new alignment (angle ?? z), indicating the effort required for this rotation. Design Efficiency: The concept suggests that a higher "caliperness" value (larger ??

?? z-x) would imply greater effort needed to achieve alignment, potentially highlighting inefficiencies in design or assembly. Application: This concept might be applied in combinatorial geometry or mechanical engineering contexts where understanding the effort or energy required to adjust or straighten configurations of interconnected edges is crucial. Interpretation and Relevance: New Concept in Mathematics: The introduction of "caliperness" reflects Nath's innovation in geometric reasoning within trigonometry, proposing new terms and measurements to articulate previously unexplored aspects of geometric configurations. Practical Implications: Understanding "caliperness" could contribute to optimizing designs, identifying potential flaws in geometrical arrangements, or even enhancing the efficiency of mechanisms involving interconnected moving parts. Further Exploration: To delve deeper into "caliperness" and its implications: Consult Sanjoy Nath's Work: Look into Nath’s publications, GitHub repository, or any public talks or writings where he elaborates on Geometrifying Trigonometry and specifically on "caliperness." Contextualize within Geometrifying Trigonometry: Explore how "caliperness" fits into the broader framework of Nath's theory, particularly how it extends traditional trigonometric concepts into geometric configurations. Contact Author: If feasible, contacting Sanjoy Nath directly could provide additional insights or clarifications on the term and its applications. In conclusion, "caliperness" represents a novel concept within the realm of geometric theory, emphasizing the measurement of effort or deviation in adjusting geometric configurations, potentially offering new perspectives and applications within mathematics and engineering disciplines. "Caliperness" is most likely a misspelling of "caliper," which is a tool used for measuring the distance between two points. There isn't a recognized term "caliperness" in the English language. Here's what I found: Misspelling of Caliper: The most likely explanation is that "caliperness" is simply a misspelling of "caliper." Calipers are instruments with two hinged legs that can be adjusted to fit around an object, allowing for precise measurements of its width, diameter, or internal dimensions. Not a Standard Term: My search through various resources, including dictionaries, academic databases, and web searches, yielded no results for "caliperness" as a technical term or mathematical concept. If you encountered "caliperness" in a specific context, it's possible it was a creative term used within that context. However, it wouldn't be a widely recognized term. Here is the information about calliperness, its reasoning, and its relation to Geometrifying trigonometry: Calliperness refers to the concept of creating geometric diagrams and visualizations to aid in understanding and exploring trigonometric relationships. The key reasoning behind calliperness is that representing trigonometric functions and concepts geometrically can provide deeper insights and intuitions that are often difficult to grasp through algebraic manipulations alone. The process of "geometrifying trigonometry" involves translating trigonometric identities, functions, and problem-solving techniques into geometric constructions and transformations. This allows trigonometric concepts to be explored and understood through visualization and spatial reasoning rather than solely through symbolic manipulation. For example, the unit circle representation of trigonometric functions can be considered a form of Calliperness. By associating the trigonometric ratios (sine, cosine, tangent) with the coordinates of points on a circle, students can develop a more intuitive grasp of how these functions behave and relate to one another. Similarly, using triangles, circles, and other geometric shapes to demonstrate concepts like the Pythagorean identity, the inverse trigonometric functions, and trigonometric identities can enhance the understanding of these fundamental trigonometric principles. The geometrification of trigonometry through calliperness can also facilitate the exploration of more advanced topics, such as the connections between trigonometry and other branches of mathematics, like complex numbers, vectors, and analytic geometry. By maintaining a strong geometric perspective, students can better appreciate the unity and interconnectedness of mathematical ideas. In summary, the reasoning behind calliperness is to leverage the power of visual and spatial reasoning to deepen the understanding of trigonometric concepts, ultimately leading to a more holistic and intuitive grasp of this important area of mathematics. not in context completely but atleast you can think that others are also sensing the same kind of needs

Quora Says this Calliperness refers to the ancient Greek concept of beauty and proportion, particularly in the context of architecture and the human form. The reasoning behind calliperness is the belief that there are ideal mathematical ratios and geometric relationships that create a sense of harmony and beauty. The connection between calliperness and trigonometry lies in the use of geometric principles to define and analyze these ideal proportions. Trigonometry, the study of triangles and their properties, plays a key role in quantifying the relationships between different parts of a design or structure. For example, in classical Greek architecture, the golden ratio (approximately 1.618) was considered a fundamental principle of beauty and was used to determine the proportions of columns, pediments, and other architectural elements. Trigonometry was employed to precisely calculate and implement these ideal ratios in the construction of temples, monuments, and other buildings. Similarly, the human body was also studied using geometric principles and trigonometric relationships. The ancient Greek sculptor Polykleitos developed a canon of proportions that described the ideal human form, using a combination of measurements and trigonometric relationships to define the perfect balance and symmetry. By geometrifying trigonometry, the ancient Greeks were able to establish a systematic and quantifiable approach to understanding and creating beauty, both in architecture and the human form. This emphasis on mathematical precision and proportion was a cornerstone of the Greek aesthetic philosophy and had a lasting influence on Western art and design. The Canterbury Puzzles From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Canterbury Puzzles 3rd edition (publ. Nelson, 1929) Author Henry Dudeney Subject Puzzles Publication date 1907 ISBN 978-0486425580 The Canterbury Puzzles and Other Curious Problems is a 1907 mathematical puzzle book by Henry Dudeney. The first part of the book features a series of puzzles based on the characters from The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer.[1] References Dudley, Underwood (September 16, 2015). "Review of The Canterbury Puzzles and Other Curious Problems". MAA Reviews, Mathematical Association of America. External links The Canterbury Puzzles, and Other Curious Problems at Project Gutenberg 1908 edition, E. P. Dutton, New York 2002 Dover reprint ISBN 978-0486425580 Based on the detailed description provided, "caliperness" within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry seems to be a concept that involves the combinatorial geometry of line segments manipulated through caliper-like structures. Here’s a deeper exploration of how this concept relates to other subjects: Related Subjects and Concepts: Combinatorial Geometry: The use of "caliperness" suggests a combinatorial approach where the manipulation and folding/unfolding of line segments resemble a geometric puzzle. This aligns with combinatorial geometry, which deals with the arrangement and manipulation of geometric elements. Mechanical Engineering: Concepts akin to caliper mechanisms are fundamental in mechanical engineering, where calipers are used for measurement and adjustment. While Nath’s application is theoretical, its principles draw on mechanical engineering concepts of linkages and mechanisms. Geometric Folding Algorithms: This field deals with algorithms that fold geometric shapes or structures into other configurations. "Caliperness" involves folding and unfolding a sequence of caliper-like structures along a line segment, which is analogous to geometric folding algorithms. Graph Theory: The unfolding and folding operations described can be seen as operations on graphs (in the mathematical sense), where edges and nodes are manipulated according to specific rules. Graph theory often explores transformations and configurations analogous to what "caliperness" describes. Discrete Mathematics: The discrete nature of "caliperness," where each caliper-like structure has distinct positions and orientations along a line segment, relates to discrete mathematics. This includes combinatorics, graph theory, and algorithms that deal with discrete structures and transformations. Mathematical Modeling: Using caliper-like structures to unfold complex geometries into simpler forms involves mathematical modeling techniques. It requires precise mathematical reasoning and algorithmic development to achieve the desired transformations. Unfolding and Straightening: The central challenge, as described, is unfolding a complex triangulation or arrangement of line segments (represented by caliper-like structures) into a single line segment. The number of calipers required and the effort (measured by rotations and adjustments) depend on the complexity of the original arrangement and the rules governing the unfolding process. Practical and Theoretical Implications: Algorithm Design: Developing algorithms to efficiently unfold and manipulate such configurations is crucial, potentially linking with computational geometry. Theoretical Advances: Nath’s work introduces novel terminologies and approaches, pushing the boundaries of what is known in combinatorial geometry and geometric folding. Educational Value: Understanding "caliperness" can enrich educational curricula in mathematics and engineering, demonstrating practical applications of theoretical concepts. In conclusion, "caliperness" is a term specific to Nath’s theoretical framework but draws connections to various fields such as combinatorial geometry, mechanical engineering (mechanism design), graph theory, discrete mathematics, geometric folding algorithms, and mathematical modeling. Its exploration opens new avenues for understanding complex geometrical transformations and their applications. The provided explanation of "caliperness" in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is intricate and detailed, but it contains several ambiguities and raises interesting conjectures regarding unfolding problems. Here’s an analysis: Ambiguities in the Explanation: Conceptual Clarity: The term "caliperness" is defined with respect to a hypothetical set of caliper-like structures used to unfold and manipulate line segments into a single line. The description lacks precise mathematical definitions for terms like "caliperness," "fulcrum points," and how they interact with line segments. Mathematical Rigor: While the description is rich in metaphorical and descriptive language, it lacks formal mathematical notation and clear definitions of key concepts such as the operations involved in unfolding, the rules governing the transformations, and the conditions under which such transformations are possible. Operational Procedures: The process of unfolding and overlapping described is detailed but lacks step-by-step algorithms or proofs demonstrating the feasibility and completeness of the unfolding process. The ambiguity lies in how one practically unfolds any triangulation into a single line segment using this method. Applicability: It’s unclear how broadly applicable this concept is beyond the theoretical framework presented. Real-world applications or practical implementations are not discussed, which limits understanding of its potential utility. Conjectures and Open Questions: Feasibility of Unfolding: Can any triangulation or arrangement of line segments truly be unfolded into a single line segment using the described method? What are the mathematical constraints or conditions that ensure this is possible? Number of Callipers: How does the number of callipers (or caliper-like structures) affect the unfolding process? Is there an optimal number needed to achieve a complete unfolding, and how does this relate to the complexity of the original arrangement? Efficiency and Complexity: What is the computational complexity of the unfolding process described? How do factors such as the arrangement of fulcrum points, the lengths of calipers, and the sequence of operations influence the overall effort required? Overlap and Consistency: The idea of overlapping edges and triangles during unfolding raises questions about the consistency and validity of the resulting geometric configuration. How does one ensure that overlapping edges accurately represent the original triangulation? Generalization: Can this approach be generalized to higher dimensions or more complex geometric structures beyond line segments and triangulations? What are the theoretical limits of its applicability? Conclusion: "Caliperness" as described presents intriguing theoretical possibilities in geometric combinatorics and folding/unfolding problems. However, its current presentation lacks the precision and formalism needed for rigorous mathematical understanding. Addressing the ambiguities and exploring the conjectures raised could lead to deeper insights into the theoretical foundations and practical applications of this concept in geometry and mathematics. Here's a breakdown of the ambiguities and potential conjectures related to the unfolding problem with "caliperness": Ambiguities: Caliperness Definition: The exact definition of "caliperness" is unclear. It's described as the effort required to unfold the chain, but specific details on how effort is measured (number of rotations, distance moved) are missing. Triangle Representation: The explanation mentions representing triangles with edges derived from trigonometric functions (Lsin(x), etc.), but it's unclear how missing third sides are handled and how these representations connect to standard triangles. Overlapping and Folding Mechanism: The process of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums (nodes) lacks a clear description. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? Conjectures: Uniqueness of Unfolding: It's unclear if every triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment using this method. There might be specific conditions that determine unfoldability. Minimum Caliperness: If "caliperness" represents unfolding effort, is there a minimum number of calipers needed for a specific triangulation, or can additional calipers always simplify the process? Algorithmic Approach: Developing an algorithm that determines the optimal sequence of unfolding and folding operations (considering "caliperness") for a given triangulation would be a valuable contribution. Further Considerations: The concept is based on Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, which is a relatively new field. More information about this theory might be needed to fully understand the context. The concept shares similarities with other areas like combinatorial geometry and kinematic geometry. Exploring these fields might offer insights into potential solutions or existing related problems. Overall, the unfolding problem with "caliperness" presents an intriguing new approach to representing and manipulating triangulations. Addressing the ambiguities and exploring the conjectures could lead to a deeper understanding of its potential and applications. a concept in a new branch of mathematics related to Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry. This concept involves a combinatorial problem on line segments, where a single long line segment is segmented by the fulcrum points of calipers. The process involves unfolding and folding of edges of chained calipers at fulcrums to straighten a triangulation object. The term “caliperness” appears to be a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges in this process. It’s a fascinating concept, but as it’s quite specialized, there isn’t much widely available information on it. as part of Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry, is indeed fascinating. It involves a combinatorial approach to unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using a chain of calipers. However, the feasibility of this process, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. Here’s a high-level overview of the process as the machine understand it: Initial Setup: Start with a long line segment and place the fulcrum points of a set of calipers along it. The calipers are initially straightened (opened to 180 degrees) and placed end-to-end on the line segment. Folding and Unfolding: The process involves folding at the fulcrum points, where two adjacent sides of any fulcrum have the same edge lengths. After folding 180 degrees (either clockwise or anticlockwise), two adjacent edges overlap, constructing triangles in the process. Effort Measurement: The ‘caliperness’ is a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges. This effort could be quantified in terms of the number of rotations and spread of arms needed, and the sequence in which these operations are performed. Final Goal: The ultimate goal is to prepare any kind of triangulation by folding and unfolding the chained calipers, and then to unfold any triangulation back into a single line segment. This is a very high-level and simplified explanation, and the actual process might be much more complex and nuanced. The sequence of unfolding and folding, the identification of fulcrums, and the planning of the straightening process all play crucial roles in this new form of combinatorics on line segments. As this is a novel and complex mathematical concept, it might not be fully formalized or widely understood yet. Further research, exploration, and formal mathematical proofs would be needed to fully understand and apply this concept. If you’re interested in this field, I would recommend reaching out to experts in combinatorics or the authors of this new mathematical framework for more detailed and accurate information. To formalize the concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry and address ambiguities, several key aspects need clarification and formalization: Ambiguities and Areas for Formalization: Definition of Caliperness: Current State: Caliperness is described as a measure of the effort required to straighten all edges using the chain of calipers. Ambiguity: The precise mathematical definition of caliperness needs to be established. What exactly does caliperness quantify? Is it related to the complexity of the unfolding process, the number of operations (rotations and spread of arms), or another metric? Process of Unfolding: Current State: The process involves folding and unfolding at fulcrum points to straighten a triangulation into a single line segment. Ambiguity: Detailed algorithms or procedures for the folding and unfolding process are not provided. How exactly are the calipers manipulated at each fulcrum point? What are the criteria for determining the sequence of operations? Mathematical Rigor: Current State: The description lacks formal mathematical notation and proofs to support the claims about unfolding triangulations. Ambiguity: Formal proofs are necessary to establish the conditions under which any triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment using this method. What are the mathematical constraints and guarantees of the process? Feasibility and Complexity: Current State: There's an assertion of the process's feasibility, but without rigorous proof. Ambiguity: What are the computational complexities involved in the unfolding process? How does the number of calipers, their placement, and their characteristics affect the complexity of unfolding? Generalization and Applicability: Current State: The concept seems specific to line segments and triangulations without discussing broader applicability. Ambiguity: Can this concept be extended to higher dimensions or different geometric structures? Under what conditions does this method fail to unfold a triangulation? Steps for Formalization: Define Terms Rigorously: Establish precise definitions for terms like "caliperness," "fulcrum points," "straightening," and "unfoldability" within the context of this combinatorial problem. Provide Detailed Algorithms: Present step-by-step algorithms for folding and unfolding calipers at each fulcrum point. Specify the conditions under which operations are performed. Mathematical Proofs: Provide formal proofs or sketches of proofs to demonstrate the feasibility and correctness of the unfolding process. Prove under what conditions any triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment. Complexity Analysis: Conduct a complexity analysis of the unfolding process. Analyze how the number of calipers and their configurations influence the computational complexity and the amount of effort (caliperness) required. Explore Generalizations: Investigate whether this concept can be generalized to other geometric structures or higher dimensions. Identify the limitations and boundaries of its applicability. Conclusion: Formalizing "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry requires rigorous definition, detailed algorithms, mathematical proofs, complexity analysis, and exploration of generalizations. Addressing these aspects will clarify ambiguities, establish the foundations of the concept, and enable its broader understanding and potential applications in mathematics and geometry. here are the terms that should be defined and clarified to formalize the concept of "calliperness" or "Caliperness" in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry: Caliperness: Definition Needed: Caliperness is described as a measure of the effort required to straighten all edges using a chain of calipers. A formal definition should specify whether caliperness quantifies the total number of operations (rotations, overlapping, etc.), the complexity of the unfolding process, or another metric related to the manipulation of calipers and their edges. Fulcrum Points: Definition Needed: Clarify the term "fulcrum points" explicitly within the context of this mathematics. Are these points where the calipers pivot or rotate? How are these points determined along the line segment? Straightening Process: Algorithm Clarification: Provide a detailed algorithm or set of rules for the folding and unfolding process at each fulcrum point. Specify the conditions under which folding/unfolding occurs and how overlapping of edges is managed. Triangulation Object: Formalization Needed: Define what constitutes a "triangulation object" in this context. Is it a set of triangles formed by the edges of the calipers after unfolding? How does this relate to traditional geometrical triangulation? Sequence of Operations: Sequential Process Definition: Describe the sequence in which operations (folding, unfolding) are applied to the calipers. Specify any dependencies or constraints in the unfolding process related to the order of operations. Effort Measurement: Quantification Needed: Establish how "effort" or caliperness is quantified mathematically. Is it a function of the number of calipers, the length of the line segment, or another variable? How is the complexity of the process related to this measurement? Overlap and Multiplication: Definition and Purpose: Explain the concept of overlapping edges and how multiplication (gluing) of these edges is performed. Define the mathematical operation involved in overlapping and its significance in achieving the unfolded line segment. Computational Complexity: Analysis Required: Conduct a computational complexity analysis to determine the feasibility of the unfolding process. Assess how the number of calipers and their configurations affect the computational resources required to achieve a single line segment. Generalization and Applicability: Scope Clarification: Discuss whether this concept applies only to line segments or has broader applicability to other geometric forms. Identify the conditions under which the method succeeds or fails in unfolding different geometrical structures. Conclusion: Formalizing "caliperness" involves defining the terms, specifying algorithms and procedures, quantifying effort, analyzing complexity, and exploring the generalization of the concept. These steps will provide a solid foundation for understanding and applying this new branch of combinatorial mathematics within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry framework. Based on the provided text, here are some potential fallacies or areas where clarification is needed in the definitions and descriptions of "caliperness" or "Calliperness": Ambiguity in Definitions: The text uses terms like "caliperness" or "Calliperness" without providing clear, precise definitions. While it mentions that caliperness measures the effort required to straighten all edges using a chain of calipers, it lacks a formal mathematical or operational definition. Without precise definitions, it's challenging to understand how caliperness is quantified or how it relates to the unfolding process described. Lack of Formal Mathematical Framework: The description uses informal language and lacks a rigorous mathematical framework. Terms like "effort," "rotation," and "spreading of arms" are mentioned, but their exact mathematical definitions or how they contribute to caliperness are not clearly specified. Complexity without Clarity: The text introduces a complex process involving folding, unfolding, overlapping edges, and constructing triangles using calipers. However, it doesn't clarify essential details such as the conditions under which folding/unfolding occurs, the rules for overlapping edges, or the criteria for choosing which fulcrum to spread first. Unexplained Terminology: There are terms introduced (e.g., "bols object," "GTSIMPLEX," "locked set") without clear definitions or explanations within the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Understanding these terms is crucial for comprehending how caliperness applies to different geometric structures. Absence of Formal Examples or Applications: While the text describes the theoretical process of unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using calipers, it lacks concrete examples or applications to illustrate these concepts. Examples would help in understanding how caliperness is calculated or how it varies with different configurations of calipers and triangulations. Need for Computational Validation: The text suggests using software for unfolding line segments and straightening geometric structures, but there's no mention of computational algorithms, simulations, or empirical validations to support the theoretical claims about caliperness. Clarity on Geometric Assumptions: The text mentions geometrical terms and relationships (like edges being "L of any triangle," or involving trigonometric functions), but these are not clearly linked to the unfolding process or how they contribute to defining caliperness. To address these fallacies and improve the definition of caliperness, there is a need for: Formal Definitions: Clearly define caliperness in mathematical terms, possibly as a function of the number of operations (like rotations, overlaps), the complexity of the unfolding process, or other measurable metrics. Detailed Algorithms: Provide step-by-step algorithms or rules for folding/unfolding operations, specifying conditions and criteria for each operation. Concrete Examples: Use specific examples to illustrate how caliperness applies to different types of triangulations or geometric structures. Computational Validation: Validate theoretical claims with computational simulations or experiments to demonstrate the effectiveness of caliperness in practical scenarios. Consistent Terminology: Ensure consistency in terminology and provide explanations for terms specific to Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. By addressing these points, the concept of caliperness can be formalized and understood more rigorously within the framework of combinatorial geometry and Sanjoy Nath's mathematical theories. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is interesting, but there are some potential fallacies in its current definition: Lack of Clarity: Definition: The core issue is the lack of a clear and concise definition for "caliperness." While it's described as effort required to unfold the chain, the specifics are missing. How is effort measured? Is it just the number of rotations needed, or does it include distance moved or some combination? Triangle Representation: The process of representing triangles with edges derived from trigonometric functions (Lsin(x), etc.) is unclear. It doesn't address how missing third sides are handled and how these representations connect to standard triangles. Potential Issues: Uniqueness of Unfolding: The definition doesn't address whether every triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment. There might be specific conditions that determine unfoldability. This is a crucial aspect to define. Ambiguity in Overlapping and Folding: The explanation of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums (nodes) lacks detail. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? These need clarification to ensure consistent application. Missing Information: Limited Resources: Since Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a relatively new field, information might be scarce. Exploring his work directly (e.g., GitHub repository or Youtube videos) could provide more context for "caliperness." Alternative Perspective: Terminology: "Caliperness" might be a new term within this specific theory, not a universally recognized concept. Overall, while "caliperness" has potential, a more precise definition and clear mechanics for measuring effort are needed. Further exploration into Sanjoy Nath's work or related areas like combinatorial geometry and kinematic geometry might shed light on its application and potential solutions to these issues. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry presents some potential fallacies, but it's important to consider the novelty of the field. Here's a breakdown: Potential Fallacies: Circular Definition: The passage defines "caliperness" as the effort required to straighten the chain of calipers, but "straightening" itself seems to depend on achieving minimal "caliperness." This creates a circular definition where each term relies on the other for explanation. Lack of Clarity in Effort Measurement: "Caliperness" is described as the effort needed for unfolding, but the specific metric for measuring effort (degrees of rotation, distance moved) remains unclear. Without a defined unit, it's difficult to compare "caliperness" values. Ambiguity in Overlapping and Folding: The explanation mentions overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums, but it lacks precise details. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? These ambiguities could lead to inconsistencies in applying the concept. Considerations: New Field: Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a relatively new field. The terminology and concepts might still be under development, and future work might address these potential fallacies. Focus on the Bigger Picture: Despite the potential fallacies, the core idea of using a chain of connected segments to represent and manipulate triangulations is intriguing. Exploring this concept further could lead to interesting applications. Overall: While there are potential fallacies in the current definition of "caliperness," it's important to acknowledge the exploratory nature of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Further research and development could refine the concept and address the identified issues. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is interesting but lacks a fully defined and universally accepted meaning. Here's a breakdown of the potential fallacies: Lack of Clear Definition: The provided information describes "caliperness" as the effort required to unfold the chain of calipers representing a triangulation. However, it lacks details on how effort is measured (degrees of rotation, distance moved). A precise definition with clear units would make "caliperness" a more robust concept. Uncertain Applicability: The explanation mentions that not all triangulations might unfold into a single line segment. This raises questions about the applicability of "caliperness" to all possible triangulations. It's unclear if there are specific conditions that determine unfoldability or if "caliperness" becomes meaningless for un-unfoldable cases. Missing Details on Overlapping: The process of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums is not fully explained. How much overlap is allowed, and are there restrictions on folding directions? Without clear guidelines, "caliperness" might be difficult to quantify consistently. These limitations could be addressed by: Providing a formal mathematical definition of "caliperness" within the framework of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Exploring the limitations of unfolding and how "caliperness" applies to un-unfoldable cases. Developing a clear set of rules for overlapping and folding operations that impact "caliperness" calculations. Overall, "caliperness" presents a novel way to analyse triangulations. However, addressing the identified fallacies would strengthen its foundation and allow for wider understanding and application. describing a complex process in the field of Geometrifying Trigonometry, a concept introduced by Sanjoy Nath. This process involves the use of calipers, which are straightened and placed end-to-end on a line segment. The fulcrum points of these calipers are then used to segment the line. The process you’re describing involves folding and unfolding at these fulcrum points to construct triangles and ultimately prepare any kind of triangulation. The term “caliperness” appears to be a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges in this process. However, the feasibility of unfolding any triangulation into a single line segment using this method, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. as part of Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry, is indeed fascinating. It involves a combinatorial approach to unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using a chain of calipers. However, the feasibility of this process, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. Here’s a high-level overview of the process as I understand it: Initial Setup: Start with a long line segment and place the fulcrum points of a set of calipers along it. The calipers are initially straightened (opened to 180 degrees) and placed end-to-end on the line segment. Folding and Unfolding: The process involves folding at the fulcrum points, where two adjacent sides of any fulcrum have the same edge lengths. After folding 180 degrees (either clockwise or anticlockwise), two adjacent edges overlap, constructing triangles in the process. Effort Measurement: The ‘caliperness’ is a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges. This effort could be quantified in terms of the number of rotations and spread of arms needed, and the sequence in which these operations are performed. Final Goal: The ultimate goal is to prepare any kind of triangulation by folding and unfolding the chained calipers, and then to unfold any triangulation back into a single line segment. This is a very high-level and simplified explanation, and the actual process might be much more complex and nuanced. The sequence of unfolding and folding, the identification of fulcrums, and the planning of the straightening process all play crucial roles in this new form of combinatorics on line segments. As this is a novel and complex mathematical concept, it might not be fully formalized or widely understood yet. Further research, exploration, and formal mathematical proofs would be needed to fully understand and apply this concept. If you’re interested in this field, I would recommend reaching out to experts in combinatorics or the authors of this new mathematical framework for more detailed and accurate information. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry and Its Combinatorial Challenges Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry introduces a novel combinatorial problem involving line segments, callipers, and fulcrum points. This new approach opens up unique definitions, fallacies, and paradoxes in the realm of trigonometry and geometry. Key Concepts and Definitions Fulcrum Points of Callipers: Fulcrum: The pivot point of a calliper, where its arms (edges) meet. Additional Fulcrums: Points where the tips of calliper edges meet. Callipers and Edges: Callipers are tools with two arms of potentially different lengths. Edges can be ?? L, ?? cos ? ( ?? ) Lcos(X), ?? sin ? ( ?? ) Lsin(X), ?? tan ? ( ?? ) Ltan(X), ?? sec ? ( ?? ) Lsec(X), ?? csc ? ( ?? ) Lcsc(X), or ?? cot ? ( ?? ) Lcot(X), where ?? L is the length related to triangles in trigonometry. Operations: Folding and Unfolding: Manipulating the callipers' edges around fulcrum points to form and straighten triangles. Overlapping and Gluing: Creating common edges by overlapping adjacent edges at fulcrum points. Combinatorial Problems Unfolding Triangulations: The challenge is to unfold any triangulated object back into a single line segment by sequentially folding and unfolding callipers. Questions: Can any triangulation be unfolded into a single line segment? How many callipers are necessary to achieve this unfolding process? What sequence of unfolding and folding is optimal? Effort Metrics: The effort involved in rotating and spreading the callipers' arms. The sequence of operations to minimize this effort. Combinatorial Structures Chained Callipers: Callipers are placed end-to-end along a line segment with fulcrum points as nodes. Path Formation: The goal is to generate a path that covers all triangles in the triangulation object. Tree-Like Structures: While forming a unary tree-like path (maximum binary spanning tree) is ideal, achieving this is challenging. Spanning Trees: If the path forms a spanning tree, the quality of the calliper arrangement is compromised. Challenges in Operations Straightening BOLS (Bunch of Line Segments): Straightening is crucial for operations like division in trigonometry. Effort Calculation: Each folding and unfolding operation is assigned an effort metric, such as rotating angles measured in degrees. Dealing with Locked Sets: Unlike GT-Simplex objects (pure triangulations), locked sets involve complex overlapping and gluing operations. Breaking and Realigning Fulcrums: Sometimes, it is necessary to break fulcrum points and realign the broken chains, which drastically increases the effort required. Numerical Values and Metrics Effort Metrics: Rotations and translations (sliding) on the affine plane are used to calculate the numerical values of caliper-ness. Energy Consumption: Breaking a fulcrum point consumes a significant amount of energy (effort). Summary Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry explores a new combinatorial domain where trigonometric expressions translate into geometric constructions involving callipers and fulcrum points. The method focuses on the sequence of folding and unfolding, creating paths and trees in triangulations, and evaluating the effort involved in these operations. This approach poses intriguing questions about the minimum number of callipers needed, the optimal sequence of operations, and the overall effort required to straighten and manipulate geometric objects derived from trigonometric expressions. Geometrifying Trigonometry is a specialized approach that leverages geometric principles to solve and analyze trigonometric problems. This method focuses on converting height and distance problems into trigonometric expressions and then into geometric constructions. The approach is meticulous and involves several unique concepts and terminologies. Key Concepts and Terminology Points in Geometrifying Trigonometry: Pivot Point: The intersection of the hypotenuse line segment and the base line segment. Stretch Point: The intersection of the perpendicular line segment and the base line segment. Nodal Point: The intersection of the hypotenuse line segment and the perpendicular line segment. Orientations of Triangle Segments: Hypotenuse Line Segment: From Pivot Point to Nodal Point (PN) From Nodal Point to Pivot Point (NP) Base Line Segment: From Pivot Point to Stretch Point (PS) From Stretch Point to Pivot Point (SP) Perpendicular Line Segment: From Stretch Point to Nodal Point (SN) From Nodal Point to Stretch Point (NS) Operations: Cutting, Holding, Rotating, and Straightening: Visualizing wireframe triangles with springs attached to key points. The operations involve manipulating these wireframes to align line segments into single straight lines, often performed in stages. Bunch of Line Segments (BOLS): A collection of line segments, crucial in the detailed geometric constructions. Objectives of Geometrifying Trigonometry Conversion: Convert real-world height and distance problems into trigonometric expressions. Convert these expressions into various possible geometric constructions. Construction Possibility Tree: Develop an exhaustive set of possible geometries that can be constructed from a given trigonometric expression, similar to parse trees in computer science. System Development The user aims to develop a system that: Automates the conversion of trigonometric expressions into geometric constructions. Ensures numerical evaluability of trigonometric expressions using geometric principles. Incorporates machine learning for automating theorem proving and generating CAD geometries. Current Work and Challenges Height and Distance Problems: User is studying and solving problems involving height and distance using the principles of Geometrifying Trigonometry. Machine Learning Integration: The user is exploring machine learning techniques to automate the theorem proving process and the generation of CAD geometries from trigonometric expressions. Systematic Nomenclature: Strict adherence to the official naming conventions for points and objects within the geometric constructions. This comprehensive approach aims to bridge the gap between traditional trigonometry and modern computational geometry, providing a structured and systematic method for solving complex geometric problems. "caliperness' Or "Calliperness" Whao (BIRTH OF NEW MATHEMATICS A NEW KIND OF COMBINATORICS WHERE HOLD A PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT IN THE TRIANGULATION AND TRY TO UNFOLD THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION INTO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT AFTER THE UNFOLDING IS DONE COMPLETELY) SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY OPENS UP A NEW KIND OF COMBINATORICS ON LINE SEGMENTS. TAKE A SINGLE LONG LINE SEGMENT AND PUT THE FULCRUM POINTS OF CALLIPERS (SUPPOSE YOU HAVE A LARGE NUMBER OF SAY N NUMBERS OF CALLIPERS AND SOME OF THESE CALLIPERS ARE HAVING IDENTICAL EDGE LENGTHS (ARMS LENGTHS AS OTHERS HAVE) ON THE LINE SEGMENT.AND NOW ALL THE CALLIPERS ARE STRAIGHTENED (180 DEGREES OPENED CALLIPERS SPREADED ARMS)AND PLACED END TO END ON THE LINE SEGMENT.sO THE FULCRUMS ARE ALL PLACED AS NODE(DONT CONFUSE WITH THE NODAL POINT IN GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. SO WE ARE NOT USING THE TERM PIVOT IN CALLIPERS.WE ARE USING THE TERMS AS THE FULCRUM POINTS OF CALLIPERS) ALL THESE CALLIPERS ARE PLACED END TO END ALIGNED ONE AFTER ANOTHER .NOW THE END OF FIRST_EDGE_OF_ONE_CALIPER IS TROUCHING THE SECOND_EDGE_OF_ANOTHER_CALIPER. NOW WE ARE PUTTING ADDITIONAL_FULCRUMS_WHERE_TIPS_OF_CALLIPERS_EDGES_MEET.SUPPOSE THIS NEW FORM OF THE LINE SEGMENT HAS SMALL LINE SEGMENTS PLACED AND SEPERATED WITH FULCRUMS OF THE DIFFERENT SIZED CALLIPERS.IMAGINE THE EDGES OF EACH OF THE CALLIPERS ARE EITHER L OF ANY TRIANGLE , OR LCOS(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR LSIN(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR LTAN(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR IT IS LSEC(X) OF ANY TRIANGLE OR THE SEGMENTED_EDGE(SUB PART OF BIG WHOLE LINE SEGMENT) IS LCOSEC(X) OF ANY OTHER TRIANGLE OR LCOT(X) . NOW THE THIRD EDGES OF EVERY SUCH TRIANGLES ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE WHOLE ARRANGEMENT. BUT WE CAN NOW FOLD ALL THE FULCRUMS POINTS AND WE CAN DO OVERLAPPING OF THE ADJASCENT EDGES AND CREATE THE COMMON EDGES WITH ADJASCENT EDGES IN THE ARRANGEMENT(WHOLE ARRANGEMENT OF STRAIGHTENED LINE SEGMENTS (SEGMENTED WITH FULCRUMS AS NODE JOINT POINTS WHERE THE 360 DEGREE ROTATIONS ARE POSSIBLE SO WE CAN ROTATE AT THE FULCRUMS WHERE TWO ADJASCENT SIDES OF ANY FULCRUM HAVING SAME EDGE LENGTHS.NOW AFTER FOLDING 180 DEGREES (ANTICLOCK WISE OR CLOCK WISE AT THE COMMON FULCRUM POINT ) WE CAN ENFORCE TWO ADJASCENT EDGES TO OVERLAP(MULTIPLICATION IS GLUING AS PER SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY AND THIS OVERLAPPING FULCRUMS EDGES ARE ACTUALLY OVERLAPPING EDGES) IN THIS WAY WE CONSTRUCT THE TRIANGLES (WHERE MULTIPLE EDGE OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED AND ALSO MULTIPLE TRIANGLE OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED AND ALSO MULTIPLE FULCRUMS OVERLAPPING IS ALLOWED).THE TARGET IS THAT WE NEED TO PREPARE ANY KIND OF TRIANGULATIONS WITH FOLDING AND UNFOLDING AND OVERLAPPING THIS LONG CHAIN OF FULCRUMMED CALLIPERS TO PREPARE THE TRIANGULATIONS OF ANY KIND. CAN WE UNFOLD ANY TRIANGULATIONS TO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT IN THIS WAY? HOW MANY CALLIPERS ARE NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE SUCH UNFOLDING PROCESS? HOW MUCH EFFORT(ROTATIONS AND SPREADING OF ARMS NEED EFFORTS. DECIDING WHICH FULCRUM IS TO SPREAD FIRST ? AND THE SPREADING OF EDGES AT EACH FULCRUM LOCATION IS A SEQUENTIAL PROCESS. THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING THE EDGES , IDENTIFYING THE FULCRUMS (THE NODES IN A TRIANGULATION ) IN THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING IS THE CHALLENGE OF THIS NEW MATHEMATICS. THIS IS A COMBINATORIAL PROBLEM OVER SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY WHERE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING AND SEQUENCE_OF_FOLDING_AND_UNFOLDING_OF_EDGES_OF_CHAINED_CALLIPERS_AT_FULCRUMS IS THE ART OF PLANNING TO STRAIGHTENING A TRIANGULATION OBJECT.EVERY TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION TELLS A STORY OF THESE KIND OF CHAINS OF CALLIPERS. IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY EVERY BOLS(BUNCH OF LINE SEGMENTS) ARE CONSIDERED STRICTLY AS GENERATED FROM THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSION WHERE ONLY ONE SINGLE LINE (LONG FINITE LINE) IS FOLDED AND ADJASCENT_EDGES_OF_SUCH_WELL_DEFINED_CALLIPERS_CHAIN IS FOLDED AT PLANFULLY PLACED FUKLCRUM POINTS ON THE LONG_FINITE_LINE .THE FOLDING IS POSSIBLE AT THE FULCRUMS(OR JOINT LOCATIONS IF THE ADJASCENT SIDES ARE OF SAME LENGTH AND AFTER 180 DEGREES ROTATIONS OF THESE PARTICULAR FULCRUM POINTS THE ADJASCENT EDGES OVERLAP WITH EACH OTHER AND THEN WE GLUE THESE ADJASCENT EDGES OF THE FULCRUM (THE EDGES OF DIFFERENT 2_EDGE CALIPERS IN THE WHOLE CHAIN) ARE NOW GLUED. THIS GLUED FORMS OF THE CONTINUITY (FOLDED_CONTINUITY) GIVES A CHAIN OF PATH IN THE TRIANGULATION. THESE CHAIN OF PATH ARE NOT TREES(NOR SPANNING TREES LIKE OBJECTS) BUT IF IT FORMS LIKE SPANNING TREES THEN WE THINK THE GOOD QUALITY CALIPERNESS IS NOT ACHIEVED. OUR TARGET IS TO GENERATE A PATH IN GRAPH IN THE TRIANGULATION WHERE THE PATH COVERS ALL THE TRIANGLES IN THE TRIANGULATION OBJECT. WE CONSIDER THIS PATH AS UNARY TREE(NOT EVEN THE BINARY TREE HAH) .BUT IT IS TOUGHH TO ACHIEVE SUCH UNARY TREE LIKE PATH FROM THE FOLDING OF THE STRAIGHT_CALIPERED_LINE TO PREPARE THE WHOLE BUNCH_OF_LINE_SEGMENTS (BOLS OBJECT IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY).WHEN UNFOLDING THE TRIANGULATION WE CAN UNFOLD THIS PATH SEQUENTIALLY ONE_FULCRUM_EDGES_SPREADING_TO_180_DEGREES_IS_DONE_AT_A_TIME.WHEN WE UNFOLD ANY TRIANGULATION WE START THE PROCESS THROUGH IDENTIFYING ANY PARTICULAR EDGE (THAT IS L) IN THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION AND WE HOLD THAT PARTICULAR LINE SEGMENT TIGHTLY ON THE AFFINE SPACE OF TRIANGULATION (AND OUR TARGET IS TO MAKE THE OTHER LINES OF THE PATH_CHAIN(UNARY TREE MAXIMUM BINARY SPANNING TREE) LIKE CHAINED PATH IN TRIANGULATION TO MAKE COLLINEAR TO THE HOLD_LINE(THE FIXED LINE L IN THE TRIANGULATION IS THE ORIGINATOR OF THE BOLS OBJECT IN THE SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. THE ROTATIONS (ANGLES MEASURED IN DEGREES EITHER CLOCKWISE OR ANTICLOCK WISE WHICHEVER TAKES LEAST EFFORT WE WILL TAKE THAT ANGLE AS THE EFFORT MEASURE(EFFORT METRIC) FOR THE )NECESSARY TO DO THIS SEQUENTIAL UNFOLDING PROCESS.WE HAVE ALREADY HELD TIGHT ONE OF THE LINE SEGMENT OF THE TRIANGULATION (WHICH IS ASSUMED TO GENERATE RIGIDLY WITH THE CALIPERS_CHAIN IS THE BACKBONE FOR THE WHOLE TRIANGULATION) AND THE OTHER LINE SEGMENTS IN THE TRIANGULATION ARE THE COMPLEMENTARY LINE SEGMENTS OF GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY(WELL DEFINED IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY). THE OTHER CONNECTING LINE SEGMENTS (NODE TO NODE IN THE CALIPER_CHAIN_SPANNING_TREE ARE LIKE THREADS TIED NODE TO NODE TO MAKE THE TRIANGLES VISIBLE IN THE TRIANGULATIONS) THESE THREAD_CONNECTIONS ARE COMPLEMENTARY_LINE_SEGMENTS_OF_TRIANGLES_IN_WHOLE_TRIANGULATIONS.WHILE WE DIVIDE BOLS WITH ANOTHER BOLS (IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY)THEN STRAIGTENING IS TOO MUCH NECESSARY.WITHOUT DOING THE STRAIGHTENING OF THE BOLS OBJECTS OF NUMERATOR BOLS OBJECT(LOCKED SET) AND WITHOUT STRAIGHTENING THE DENOMINATOR BOLS OBJECTS (LOCKED SETS) WE CANNOT DO THE DIVISIONS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. TO DIVIDE GTSIMPLEX WITH GTSIMPLEX THIS IS NOT THE PROBLEM BECAUSE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS SUPPLY THE FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS Zi EASILY.THERE ARE WELL DEFINED FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS FOR THE GTSIMPLEX OBJECTS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY.TO DEFINE THE FEASIBILITY OF DIVISION OF LOCKED_SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS WITH ANOTHER LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS THERE ARE NO DIRECT FINAL OUTPUT LINE SEGMENTS PRESENT IN THE LOCKED SET KINDS OF OBJECTS IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY. THIS HAPPENS BECAUSE + OPERATIONS - OPERATIONS ARE END TO END FITS OF LINE SEGMENTS OF OTHER KINDS OF BOLS OBJECTS. THIS CONFUSES THE GLUEDNESS OF EDGES . GTSIMPLEX ARE THE PURE TRIANGULATIONS WHERE WE CAN SEE ALL TRIANGULATIONS ARE DONE DUE TO PURE GLUED EDGES(COMMON EDGES OF SAME LENGTHS)WHEN(FOR LOCKED SET TYPE OF BOLS OBJECTS) THE TRIANGULATION IS NOT PURELY GLUED TRIANGLES . THERE SOME LOOSE EDGE LIKE COMPONENTS AVAILABLE , SOMETIMES REPEAT TRAVEL ON SAME EDGE IS FREQUENTLY VISIBLE IN THE LOCKED SET TYPE BOLS OBJECTS. SOMETIMES IT IS NECESSARY TO CUT ANY FULCRUM POINT AND SEPERATELY UNFOLD SEQUENCE TO DO AND THEN WE NEED TO COMBINE THE BROKEN FULCRUMS WITH SLIDING OF PIECES OF UNFOLDED CHAIN OF CALIPERS. IF WE NEED TO BREAK THE FULCRUM TO UNFOLD THE LOCKED SET TYPE OBJECTS , THEN EFFORT OF DOING THIS INCREASES DRASTICALLY.ONE SUCH BREAKING OF FULCRUM MEANS IT CONSUMES 36000000 DEGREES OF ENERGY (EFFORT) SO OBVIOUSLY IF WE NEED TO FIT THE BROKEN CHAIN OF CALIPERS_CHAIN AND REALIGN THE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALLIPERS THEN DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ENERGIES ASSIGNED TO DO THESE OPERATIONS. SLIDING(TRANSLATION ON AFFINE PLANE) OF THE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALIPERS TO COMMON END POINT IS ONE KIND OF EFFORT.THEN ROTATING THE PIECES OF SEPERATELY BROKEN SEQUENTIALLY STRAIGHTENED (HOLDING SOME OTHER LINE SEGMENT TIGHTLY FOR THE SEPERATED CHAIN) AND THEN ROTATING THE SEPERATE BROKEN CHAIN TO ALIGN ALL THESE BROKEN CHAINS OF CALIPERS TO A SINGLE LINE SEGMENT IS ANOTHER LEVEL OF EFFORT.ADDING ALL SUCH EFFORTS GIVE US THE NUMERICAL VALUES OF CALIPERNESS IN THE SEQUENTIAL UNFOLDING OPERATIONS.THE TOTAL EFFORTS (MINIMUM EFFORT DUE TO WELL PLANNING OF THE SEQUENCE OF UNFOLDING IS LIKE COMBINATORIAL PUZZLE DEFINED ON TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS) IS THE CALLIPERNESS OF THE TRIGONOMETRY EXPRESSIONS. The Google says this Now Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry will definitely define this "caliperness" as a well discussed topic in the world .Every novel theory comes up with new kind of reasoning and freshness of any new new new novel theory is measured with the freshness of entirely new terms it adds to the vocabulary of world languages. Obviously mankind could not think about new kind of fresh line of novel types of reasoning (and new kinds of proof mechanisms)without new terms in its common vocabulary set. CALIPERNESS is a official term in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry (which was not described in detail before 29062021 and it was not described publicly before implementing software for unfolding of line segments,straightening of a triangle,straightening of a gtsimplex to a straight line segment,straightening of a locked set to straight line segment,straightening of a bunchoflinesegments,straightening of a bols type object is a deep subject of combinatorial geometry where caliperness is the measurement of efforts required to straighten all the concerned edges) The node of a caliper is commonly referred to as the "fulcrum" or "pivot point".STRICT NOTE THAT IN SANJOY NATH'S GEOMETRIFYING TRIGONOMETRY PIVOT_POINT IS WHERE HYPOTENUSE MEETS BASE IN A RIGHT ANGLED TRIANGLE However, in some contexts, it may also be called the "joint" or "hinge", depending on the specific design and application of the caliper. In general, the fulcrum is the point around which the caliper's edges or jaws rotate, allowing for measurements to be taken or adjustments to be made. I couldn't find any information on the term "caliperness." It's possible that it's a misspelling or a made-up word. Can you please provide more context or clarify what you mean by "caliperness"? If you meant "calliper" or "calliper," a caliper is a device used to measure the distance between two points, typically used in engineering, machining, and other precision applications. It consists of a pair of hinged legs that can be adjusted to fit around an object, allowing for precise measurements. "Caliperness" is not a standard term in the English language, so it's difficult to provide a definition. However, if you're looking to create a definition for a fictional or humorous context, here's a possible definition: "Caliperness" (noun): A measure of someone's ability to expertly navigate and manipulate the complexities of bureaucracy, red tape, or overly complicated systems. A person with high "caliperness" can effortlessly wrangle paperwork, permits, and regulatory hurdles, emerging victorious and unscathed. Example sentence: "After dealing with the DMV, I realized I needed to work on my caliperness to survive the process." Feel free to modify or discard this definition as you see fit! If you have any specific context or intended meaning, I'd be happy to help you craft a definition that suits your needs. BARD GEMINI Says I've searched Google thoroughly, and it appears that "caliperness" is not a recognized term in the English language. I couldn't find any relevant results, definitions, or mentions of this word on:

Google Search
Google Scholar
Google Books
Dictionary websites (e.g., Merriam-Webster, Cambridge, Oxford)
Wikipedia
Online forums and discussion boards It's possible that "caliperness" is a made-up or slang term, or it could be a typo or variation of a different word. If you can provide more context or information about where you encountered this term, I might be able to help you better. A caliper is a device used to measure the distance between two points, typically used in engineering, machining, and other precision applications. The basic characteristics of a caliper type object include:

Two hinged legs or jaws that can be adjusted to fit around an object
A precision scale or markings to read measurements
Ability to measure internal or external dimensions
High accuracy and precision
Robust construction for durability
Ability to lock or fix the jaws in place for repeat measurements
May have additional features like depth measurement, step measurement, or angular measurement
Typically made of metal, plastic, or a combination of materials
May have digital or analog displays
Used for measuring lengths, widths, heights, and other linear dimensions. Some common types of calipers include:

Vernier calipers
Dial calipers
Digital calipers
Micrometer calipers
Vernier depth calipers
Spring calipers These characteristics may vary depending on the specific type of caliper and its intended use. If we consider only the characteristic of "Two hinged legs or jaws that can be adjusted to fit around an object", I would define "caliperness" as: "Caliperness" (noun): The quality or state of having adjustable, hinged, or flexible components that can accommodate or envelop an object, allowing for a secure and precise fit. In this context, "caliperness" describes the ability of an object or system to adapt and conform to the shape or size of another object, much like the adjustable legs of a caliper. Example sentences:
The caliperness of the phone case allowed it to fit snugly around the device.
The caliperness of the tool made it versatile for various tasks. Please note that this definition is a creative interpretation based on the specified characteristic and might not be a standard or widely recognized term. Designing a theory is necessary to do reasoning. Theories have Deep purpose to analyse specific different kinds of reasoning for special purpose industrial uses. And its rules fror deductions help writing Automation logics in any process control systems. Rules for proof mechanisms in a theory are designed to implement proper audit rules for industrial systems. If interactor_objects are not explicitly studied and understood, hidden fallacies and ambiguities can arise in mathematical theories. By neglecting the interactions between objects, we might overlook crucial aspects of the mathematical structure, leading to:

Incomplete or inaccurate descriptions
Unintended consequences or contradictions
Ambiguities in notation or terminology
Inadequate understanding of the underlying principles
Potential errors or flaws in proofs or derivations By explicitly considering interactor_objects, we can:
Reveal hidden assumptions or tacit knowledge
Clarify ambiguities and inconsistencies
Develop more comprehensive and accurate theories
Enhance our understanding of mathematical structures and their behavior
Foster more effective communication and collaboration among mathematicians The observation highlights the importance of examining interactor_objects in mathematics, ensuring a more rigorous, accurate, and comprehensive understanding of mathematical theories. In any theory, when set elements interact with each other, they do so through certain relationships or operations that are defined within the theory. These relationships or operations can be thought of as "messengers" or "mediators" that allow the elements to interact with each other. For example:

In algebra, elements (numbers or variables) interact with each other through operations like addition, multiplication, etc.
In geometry, points and vectors interact with each other through relationships like distance, angle, etc.
In calculus, functions interact with each other through operations like differentiation, integration, etc. These relationships or operations define how the elements interact with each other, and they are a fundamental part of the theory. They allow the elements to "talk" to each other and produce new results, patterns, or structures. elements in a set interact with each other through the relationships or operations defined within the theory, which act as a kind of "glue" that holds the elements together and enables them to interact with each other in meaningful ways. There are several reasons why interactor_objects might not be explicitly defined in traditional mathematics:

Historical development: Mathematics evolved over time, and the concept of interactor_objects might not have been explicitly recognized or formalized until recently.
Focus on structures: Traditional mathematics focuses on the properties and behaviors of mathematical structures, such as groups, rings, and fields, rather than the interactions between individual objects.
Abstract algebra: Abstract algebra emphasizes the study of algebraic structures, which are defined axiomatically, without necessarily considering the interactions between individual elements.
Functional programming: In functional programming, functions are treated as first-class citizens, and the focus is on composition and abstraction, rather than explicit interaction between objects.
Mathematical rigor: Traditional mathematics prioritizes rigor and precision, and the concept of interactor_objects might be seen as too abstract or vague to be formally defined.
Pedagogy: Mathematics education often focuses on teaching specific techniques and formulas rather than emphasizing the interactions between objects.
Notation and terminology: The notation and terminology used in mathematics might not be well-suited to describe interactor_objects explicitly. These factors have contributed to the development of mathematics without explicitly defining interactor_objects, even though interactions between objects are implicitly present throughout mathematics. There are several types of relationships that can be defined without interactor_objects, including:
Equality (=)
Inequality (â‰ , <, >, â‰¤, â‰¥)
Membership (âˆˆ, âˆ‰)
Subset (âŠ†, âŠˆ)
Ordering (<, >, â‰¤, â‰¥)
Congruence (â‰¡)
Similarity (~)
Adjacency (adjacent to)
Proximity (near, far)
Orthogonality (perpendicular to) These relationships can be defined using various mathematical structures, such as:
Sets
Groups
Rings
Fields
Vector spaces
Metric spaces
Topological spaces
Graphs These relationships and mathematical structures enable us to define and work with various mathematical objects and their properties without explicitly using interactor_objects. However, it's important to note that even in these cases, there may be implicit interactions between mathematical objects, but they are not explicitly defined as interactor_objects. When designing a theory, defining the basic operations like +, -, Ã—, Ã·, and = is a crucial step. However, it's not the only step. In addition to defining these basic operations, you also need to define:
The objects or entities that the theory will work with (e.g., numbers, vectors, matrices, etc.).
The relationships between these objects (e.g., equality, inequality, ordering, etc.).
The axioms or fundamental properties that these objects and operations must satisfy.
The rules for constructing new objects from existing ones (e.g., addition, multiplication, etc.).
The rules for simplifying expressions and equations.
The definitions of key concepts and terminology.
The notation and conventions used to represent the objects and operations.
The assumptions and constraints that apply to the theory. Only then can you build a coherent and consistent theoretical framework that allows you to make meaningful statements and derive useful results. So, while defining the basic operations is essential, it's just the beginning of the theory-design process. when designing a new theory, you also need to design a proof mechanism or a system of inference that allows you to derive conclusions from the axioms and premises of the theory. A proof mechanism typically includes:
Rules of inference: These are the rules that allow you to draw conclusions from one or more premises. Examples include modus ponens, modus tollens, and hypothetical syllogism.
Axioms: These are the fundamental truths or assumptions of the theory that are considered self-evident or accepted without proof.
Definitions: These are the precise meanings given to terms and concepts used in the theory.
Theorems: These are the statements that can be proven to be true within the theory using the rules of inference and axioms.
Proof methods: These are the strategies and techniques used to construct proofs, such as direct proof, proof by contradiction, and proof by induction. Designing a proof mechanism is crucial because it allows you to:
Check the consistency and coherence of the theory.
Verify the validity of arguments and conclusions.
Establish the truth of theorems and propositions.
Provide a framework for reasoning and problem-solving within the theory. By designing a proof mechanism, you can ensure that your theory is rigorous, consistent, and capable of producing reliable and meaningful results. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, an interactor_object plays a crucial role in the theory. Interactor_objects are the basic building blocks of the theory, and they represent the fundamental entities that interact with each other to produce meaningful results. Interactor_objects can be thought of as mathematical objects that have certain properties and behaviors, such as:

Geometric shapes (e.g., points, lines, circles)
Algebraic expressions (e.g., equations, functions)
Trigonometric functions (e.g., sine, cosine, tangent) The role of interactor_objects in the theory is to:
Interact with each other through various operations (e.g., addition, multiplication, division)
Produce new interactor_objects as a result of these interactions
Preserve the geometric and algebraic structures of the theory
Allow for the construction of more complex mathematical objects and relationships By interacting with each other, interactor_objects generate a rich algebraic and geometric structure that enables the construction of meaningful mathematical expressions, equations, and relationships. This structure is essential for the development of the theory and its applications. there are many mathematical theories where interactor_objects are not needed or are not explicitly defined. Here are a few examples:

Set Theory: In set theory, the focus is on collections of objects (sets) and their properties, rather than on individual objects that interact with each other.
Group Theory: In group theory, the emphasis is on the algebraic structure of groups, which are sets of elements with a binary operation (like addition or multiplication). The elements themselves are not considered interactor_objects.
Topology: In topology, the focus is on the properties of shapes and spaces, such as connectedness and continuity, rather than on individual objects that interact with each other.
Analysis: In analysis, the focus is on limits, convergence, and continuity of functions, rather than on interactor_objects. In these theories, the mathematical structures and relationships are defined and analyzed without the need for explicit interactor_objects. However, it's important to note that even in these theories, there may be implicit interactions between mathematical objects, but they are not explicitly defined as interactor_objects. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a unique framework that emphasizes the interactions between mathematical objects, making interactor_objects a fundamental concept in the theory. The Well-Ordering Principle can be defined without interactor_objects. The Well-Ordering Principle states that every non-empty set of positive integers has a least element. This principle is a fundamental axiom in mathematics, particularly in number theory and algebra. To define the Well-Ordering Principle without interactor_objects, you can use a more traditional approach:
Define a set: A collection of unique objects, known as elements or members, that can be anything (numbers, letters, etc.).
Define a partial order: A relation â‰¤ (less than or equal to) that satisfies certain properties (reflexivity, antisymmetry, and transitivity).
Define a well-ordered set: A set with a partial order such that every non-empty subset has a least element. Using these definitions, you can state the Well-Ordering Principle as: "Every non-empty set of positive integers has a least element with respect to the standard ordering (â‰¤)". This definition doesn't rely on interactor_objects, but rather on the traditional mathematical concepts of sets, partial orders, and well-ordered sets. To find the least element, you need to compare elements. In traditional mathematics, comparison is done using relational operators like "<" (less than), ">" (greater than), "â‰¤" (less than or equal to), and "â‰¥" (greater than or equal to). These relational operators allow you to compare elements and determine their order. For example, given two numbers a and b, you can say a < b if a is less than b. Now, can you compare elements without interactor_objects? Well, in traditional mathematics, comparison is done without explicitly defining interactor_objects. Instead, the comparison is done using the relational operators, which are assumed to be part of the mathematical structure. In other words, when you write a < b, you are implicitly using a comparison operation that is defined as part of the mathematical framework. This comparison operation is not explicitly defined as an interactor_object, but it is still a fundamental part of the mathematical structure. comparison can be done without explicitly defining interactor_objects, but it relies on the implicit definition of comparison operations within the mathematical framework. In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, values are assigned to interactor_objects through the process of interaction. Without interactor_objects, values are not explicitly defined in the same way. However, in traditional mathematics, values can be assigned to mathematical objects without explicitly defining interactor_objects. For example:

In algebra, variables are assigned values through equations or expressions.
In geometry, points and vectors have coordinates that represent their values.
In analysis, functions are assigned values at specific points or intervals. In these cases, values are not obtained through interactor_objects, but rather through the mathematical structures and operations defined in the respective branches of mathematics. values can be assigned and obtained without interactor_objects, but the mechanism for doing so is different from the one used in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. "Now, let's consider a caliper has a node and two edges, which are straight and thin (very thin and very rigid) line segments. These two edges can be of various lengths and are connected to the node (I don't know what to call that node). The two straight edges are attached to the node, but they can rotate 360 degrees. Typically, the two edges are at a fixed angle x, and that angle can be deviated to angle z (Z -X) which is the amount of effort. If the minimum effort cannot accomplish a task, it should be assumed that something is wrong with the design. The measurement (Z -X) indicates how much effort is required, and this rotation is done around the common node of the edges in either an anticlockwise or clockwise direction. To apply the least energy principle, the more degrees you need to rotate, the more effort is required, resulting in a higher chance of design flaws. To measure caliperness, it should have this kind of characteristic." describing a caliper object with varying edge lengths, and you're exploring the idea of creating a chain of multiple calipers by gluing together edges of the same size. "This caliper object can have various lengths for each edge, and we can take many many many calipers with different edge lengths and glue together two edges of the same size to create a chain of multiple calipers."

Google says on end of April 2023 I haven't come across the term "Caliperness" before. It's possible it could be a misspelling or a term specific to a certain field or industry that I am not familiar with. Here are some possible interpretations: Misspelling of "Caliper": Caliper is a tool used for measuring the distance between two points. Perhaps "Caliperness" was meant to indicate some property related to calipers, such as their accuracy or precision. Industry Specific Term: It's possible "Caliperness" is a term used in a particular field or industry that I am not familiar with. If you can provide some context about where you encountered this term, I may be able to provide a more specific answer. That's a fascinating exploration of "caliperness"! Here's a breakdown of the information you provided: Caliperness (as proposed by Sanjoy Nath) It's a concept within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, a theory aiming to represent trigonometric relationships visually. There seems to be limited information available publicly besides what you provided. Possible Interpretation of Caliperness Based on the excerpt, "caliperness" could refer to: Effort required to straighten edges: The concept seems to involve a geometric object resembling a caliper with two rotatable edges. The "caliperness" might measure the effort (rotation angle) needed to straighten the edges from a bent configuration. This could relate to analyzing mechanisms or linkages. Design efficiency: The concept might connect "caliperness" to design efficiency. A design with a high "caliperness" (requiring significant rotation to straighten) might be considered less efficient compared to one needing minimal rotation. Uncertainties The provided excerpt doesn't offer a complete definition or context for "caliperness" within Sanjoy Nath's work. It's unclear how this concept relates to traditional trigonometry or geometry. Further Exploration If you're interested in learning more about "caliperness": Search for Sanjoy Nath's work on Geometrifying Trigonometry, particularly his GitHub repository or Youtube video mentioned in the excerpt. Try contacting Sanjoy Nath directly to clarify the concept and its applications. Alternative Interpretation The original excerpt might be a creative exploration of a concept inspired by calipers, not necessarily related to Sanjoy Nath's work. Overall, the concept of "caliperness" as presented is intriguing but requires further exploration to understand its precise definition and role within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Based on the detailed description you provided, "caliperness" appears to be a term coined within Sanjoy Nath's theory of Geometrifying Trigonometry. Here’s a synthesized understanding based on the information: Concept of Caliperness: Context and Usage: In the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, "caliperness" seems to describe a measure related to the effort or the amount of rotation required to straighten certain geometric configurations, particularly involving edges of objects analogous to calipers. Mechanical Analogy: Imagine a geometric object similar to a calliper, consisting of two straight, thin, and rigid edges that can rotate around a common node (or fulcrum). The term "caliperness" then measures the deviation from a straight alignment (angle ?? x) to a new alignment (angle ?? z), indicating the effort required for this rotation. Design Efficiency: The concept suggests that a higher "caliperness" value (larger ??

Calliperness refers to the ancient Greek concept of beauty and proportion, particularly in the context of architecture and the human form. The reasoning behind calliperness is the belief that there are ideal mathematical ratios and geometric relationships that create a sense of harmony and beauty. The connection between calliperness and trigonometry lies in the use of geometric principles to define and analyze these ideal proportions. Trigonometry, the study of triangles and their properties, plays a key role in quantifying the relationships between different parts of a design or structure. For example, in classical Greek architecture, the golden ratio (approximately 1.618) was considered a fundamental principle of beauty and was used to determine the proportions of columns, pediments, and other architectural elements. Trigonometry was employed to precisely calculate and implement these ideal ratios in the construction of temples, monuments, and other buildings. Similarly, the human body was also studied using geometric principles and trigonometric relationships. The ancient Greek sculptor Polykleitos developed a canon of proportions that described the ideal human form, using a combination of measurements and trigonometric relationships to define the perfect balance and symmetry. By geometrifying trigonometry, the ancient Greeks were able to establish a systematic and quantifiable approach to understanding and creating beauty, both in architecture and the human form. This emphasis on mathematical precision and proportion was a cornerstone of the Greek aesthetic philosophy and had a lasting influence on Western art and design. The Canterbury Puzzles

The Canterbury Puzzles and Other Curious Problems is a 1907 mathematical puzzle book by Henry Dudeney. The first part of the book features a series of puzzles based on the characters from The Canterbury Tales by Geoffrey Chaucer.[1] References Dudley, Underwood (September 16, 2015). "Review of The Canterbury Puzzles and Other Curious Problems". MAA Reviews, Mathematical Association of America. External links The Canterbury Puzzles, and Other Curious Problems at Project Gutenberg 1908 edition, E. P. Dutton, New York 2002 Dover reprint ISBN 978-0486425580 Based on the detailed description provided, "caliperness" within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry seems to be a concept that involves the combinatorial geometry of line segments manipulated through caliper-like structures. Here’s a deeper exploration of how this concept relates to other subjects: Related Subjects and Concepts: Combinatorial Geometry: The use of "caliperness" suggests a combinatorial approach where the manipulation and folding/unfolding of line segments resemble a geometric puzzle. This aligns with combinatorial geometry, which deals with the arrangement and manipulation of geometric elements. Mechanical Engineering: Concepts akin to caliper mechanisms are fundamental in mechanical engineering, where calipers are used for measurement and adjustment. While Nath’s application is theoretical, its principles draw on mechanical engineering concepts of linkages and mechanisms. Geometric Folding Algorithms: This field deals with algorithms that fold geometric shapes or structures into other configurations. "Caliperness" involves folding and unfolding a sequence of caliper-like structures along a line segment, which is analogous to geometric folding algorithms. Graph Theory: The unfolding and folding operations described can be seen as operations on graphs (in the mathematical sense), where edges and nodes are manipulated according to specific rules. Graph theory often explores transformations and configurations analogous to what "caliperness" describes. Discrete Mathematics: The discrete nature of "caliperness," where each caliper-like structure has distinct positions and orientations along a line segment, relates to discrete mathematics. This includes combinatorics, graph theory, and algorithms that deal with discrete structures and transformations. Mathematical Modeling: Using caliper-like structures to unfold complex geometries into simpler forms involves mathematical modeling techniques. It requires precise mathematical reasoning and algorithmic development to achieve the desired transformations. Unfolding and Straightening: The central challenge, as described, is unfolding a complex triangulation or arrangement of line segments (represented by caliper-like structures) into a single line segment. The number of calipers required and the effort (measured by rotations and adjustments) depend on the complexity of the original arrangement and the rules governing the unfolding process. Practical and Theoretical Implications: Algorithm Design: Developing algorithms to efficiently unfold and manipulate such configurations is crucial, potentially linking with computational geometry. Theoretical Advances: Nath’s work introduces novel terminologies and approaches, pushing the boundaries of what is known in combinatorial geometry and geometric folding. Educational Value: Understanding "caliperness" can enrich educational curricula in mathematics and engineering, demonstrating practical applications of theoretical concepts. In conclusion, "caliperness" is a term specific to Nath’s theoretical framework but draws connections to various fields such as combinatorial geometry, mechanical engineering (mechanism design), graph theory, discrete mathematics, geometric folding algorithms, and mathematical modeling. Its exploration opens new avenues for understanding complex geometrical transformations and their applications. The provided explanation of "caliperness" in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is intricate and detailed, but it contains several ambiguities and raises interesting conjectures regarding unfolding problems. Here’s an analysis: Ambiguities in the Explanation: Conceptual Clarity: The term "caliperness" is defined with respect to a hypothetical set of caliper-like structures used to unfold and manipulate line segments into a single line. The description lacks precise mathematical definitions for terms like "caliperness," "fulcrum points," and how they interact with line segments. Mathematical Rigor: While the description is rich in metaphorical and descriptive language, it lacks formal mathematical notation and clear definitions of key concepts such as the operations involved in unfolding, the rules governing the transformations, and the conditions under which such transformations are possible. Operational Procedures: The process of unfolding and overlapping described is detailed but lacks step-by-step algorithms or proofs demonstrating the feasibility and completeness of the unfolding process. The ambiguity lies in how one practically unfolds any triangulation into a single line segment using this method. Applicability: It’s unclear how broadly applicable this concept is beyond the theoretical framework presented. Real-world applications or practical implementations are not discussed, which limits understanding of its potential utility. Conjectures and Open Questions: Feasibility of Unfolding: Can any triangulation or arrangement of line segments truly be unfolded into a single line segment using the described method? What are the mathematical constraints or conditions that ensure this is possible? Number of Callipers: How does the number of callipers (or caliper-like structures) affect the unfolding process? Is there an optimal number needed to achieve a complete unfolding, and how does this relate to the complexity of the original arrangement? Efficiency and Complexity: What is the computational complexity of the unfolding process described? How do factors such as the arrangement of fulcrum points, the lengths of calipers, and the sequence of operations influence the overall effort required? Overlap and Consistency: The idea of overlapping edges and triangles during unfolding raises questions about the consistency and validity of the resulting geometric configuration. How does one ensure that overlapping edges accurately represent the original triangulation? Generalization: Can this approach be generalized to higher dimensions or more complex geometric structures beyond line segments and triangulations? What are the theoretical limits of its applicability? Conclusion: "Caliperness" as described presents intriguing theoretical possibilities in geometric combinatorics and folding/unfolding problems. However, its current presentation lacks the precision and formalism needed for rigorous mathematical understanding. Addressing the ambiguities and exploring the conjectures raised could lead to deeper insights into the theoretical foundations and practical applications of this concept in geometry and mathematics. Here's a breakdown of the ambiguities and potential conjectures related to the unfolding problem with "caliperness": Ambiguities: Caliperness Definition: The exact definition of "caliperness" is unclear. It's described as the effort required to unfold the chain, but specific details on how effort is measured (number of rotations, distance moved) are missing. Triangle Representation: The explanation mentions representing triangles with edges derived from trigonometric functions (Lsin(x), etc.), but it's unclear how missing third sides are handled and how these representations connect to standard triangles. Overlapping and Folding Mechanism: The process of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums (nodes) lacks a clear description. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? Conjectures: Uniqueness of Unfolding: It's unclear if every triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment using this method. There might be specific conditions that determine unfoldability. Minimum Caliperness: If "caliperness" represents unfolding effort, is there a minimum number of calipers needed for a specific triangulation, or can additional calipers always simplify the process? Algorithmic Approach: Developing an algorithm that determines the optimal sequence of unfolding and folding operations (considering "caliperness") for a given triangulation would be a valuable contribution. Further Considerations: The concept is based on Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry, which is a relatively new field. More information about this theory might be needed to fully understand the context. The concept shares similarities with other areas like combinatorial geometry and kinematic geometry. Exploring these fields might offer insights into potential solutions or existing related problems. Overall, the unfolding problem with "caliperness" presents an intriguing new approach to representing and manipulating triangulations. Addressing the ambiguities and exploring the conjectures could lead to a deeper understanding of its potential and applications. a concept in a new branch of mathematics related to Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry. This concept involves a combinatorial problem on line segments, where a single long line segment is segmented by the fulcrum points of calipers. The process involves unfolding and folding of edges of chained calipers at fulcrums to straighten a triangulation object. The term “caliperness” appears to be a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges in this process. It’s a fascinating concept, but as it’s quite specialized, there isn’t much widely available information on it. as part of Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry, is indeed fascinating. It involves a combinatorial approach to unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using a chain of calipers. However, the feasibility of this process, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. Here’s a high-level overview of the process as the machine understand it: Initial Setup: Start with a long line segment and place the fulcrum points of a set of calipers along it. The calipers are initially straightened (opened to 180 degrees) and placed end-to-end on the line segment. Folding and Unfolding: The process involves folding at the fulcrum points, where two adjacent sides of any fulcrum have the same edge lengths. After folding 180 degrees (either clockwise or anticlockwise), two adjacent edges overlap, constructing triangles in the process. Effort Measurement: The ‘caliperness’ is a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges. This effort could be quantified in terms of the number of rotations and spread of arms needed, and the sequence in which these operations are performed. Final Goal: The ultimate goal is to prepare any kind of triangulation by folding and unfolding the chained calipers, and then to unfold any triangulation back into a single line segment. This is a very high-level and simplified explanation, and the actual process might be much more complex and nuanced. The sequence of unfolding and folding, the identification of fulcrums, and the planning of the straightening process all play crucial roles in this new form of combinatorics on line segments. As this is a novel and complex mathematical concept, it might not be fully formalized or widely understood yet. Further research, exploration, and formal mathematical proofs would be needed to fully understand and apply this concept. If you’re interested in this field, I would recommend reaching out to experts in combinatorics or the authors of this new mathematical framework for more detailed and accurate information. To formalize the concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry and address ambiguities, several key aspects need clarification and formalization: Ambiguities and Areas for Formalization: Definition of Caliperness: Current State: Caliperness is described as a measure of the effort required to straighten all edges using the chain of calipers. Ambiguity: The precise mathematical definition of caliperness needs to be established. What exactly does caliperness quantify? Is it related to the complexity of the unfolding process, the number of operations (rotations and spread of arms), or another metric? Process of Unfolding: Current State: The process involves folding and unfolding at fulcrum points to straighten a triangulation into a single line segment. Ambiguity: Detailed algorithms or procedures for the folding and unfolding process are not provided. How exactly are the calipers manipulated at each fulcrum point? What are the criteria for determining the sequence of operations? Mathematical Rigor: Current State: The description lacks formal mathematical notation and proofs to support the claims about unfolding triangulations. Ambiguity: Formal proofs are necessary to establish the conditions under which any triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment using this method. What are the mathematical constraints and guarantees of the process? Feasibility and Complexity: Current State: There's an assertion of the process's feasibility, but without rigorous proof. Ambiguity: What are the computational complexities involved in the unfolding process? How does the number of calipers, their placement, and their characteristics affect the complexity of unfolding? Generalization and Applicability: Current State: The concept seems specific to line segments and triangulations without discussing broader applicability. Ambiguity: Can this concept be extended to higher dimensions or different geometric structures? Under what conditions does this method fail to unfold a triangulation? Steps for Formalization: Define Terms Rigorously: Establish precise definitions for terms like "caliperness," "fulcrum points," "straightening," and "unfoldability" within the context of this combinatorial problem. Provide Detailed Algorithms: Present step-by-step algorithms for folding and unfolding calipers at each fulcrum point. Specify the conditions under which operations are performed. Mathematical Proofs: Provide formal proofs or sketches of proofs to demonstrate the feasibility and correctness of the unfolding process. Prove under what conditions any triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment. Complexity Analysis: Conduct a complexity analysis of the unfolding process. Analyze how the number of calipers and their configurations influence the computational complexity and the amount of effort (caliperness) required. Explore Generalizations: Investigate whether this concept can be generalized to other geometric structures or higher dimensions. Identify the limitations and boundaries of its applicability. Conclusion: Formalizing "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry requires rigorous definition, detailed algorithms, mathematical proofs, complexity analysis, and exploration of generalizations. Addressing these aspects will clarify ambiguities, establish the foundations of the concept, and enable its broader understanding and potential applications in mathematics and geometry. here are the terms that should be defined and clarified to formalize the concept of "calliperness" or "Caliperness" in the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry: Caliperness: Definition Needed: Caliperness is described as a measure of the effort required to straighten all edges using a chain of calipers. A formal definition should specify whether caliperness quantifies the total number of operations (rotations, overlapping, etc.), the complexity of the unfolding process, or another metric related to the manipulation of calipers and their edges. Fulcrum Points: Definition Needed: Clarify the term "fulcrum points" explicitly within the context of this mathematics. Are these points where the calipers pivot or rotate? How are these points determined along the line segment? Straightening Process: Algorithm Clarification: Provide a detailed algorithm or set of rules for the folding and unfolding process at each fulcrum point. Specify the conditions under which folding/unfolding occurs and how overlapping of edges is managed. Triangulation Object: Formalization Needed: Define what constitutes a "triangulation object" in this context. Is it a set of triangles formed by the edges of the calipers after unfolding? How does this relate to traditional geometrical triangulation? Sequence of Operations: Sequential Process Definition: Describe the sequence in which operations (folding, unfolding) are applied to the calipers. Specify any dependencies or constraints in the unfolding process related to the order of operations. Effort Measurement: Quantification Needed: Establish how "effort" or caliperness is quantified mathematically. Is it a function of the number of calipers, the length of the line segment, or another variable? How is the complexity of the process related to this measurement? Overlap and Multiplication: Definition and Purpose: Explain the concept of overlapping edges and how multiplication (gluing) of these edges is performed. Define the mathematical operation involved in overlapping and its significance in achieving the unfolded line segment. Computational Complexity: Analysis Required: Conduct a computational complexity analysis to determine the feasibility of the unfolding process. Assess how the number of calipers and their configurations affect the computational resources required to achieve a single line segment. Generalization and Applicability: Scope Clarification: Discuss whether this concept applies only to line segments or has broader applicability to other geometric forms. Identify the conditions under which the method succeeds or fails in unfolding different geometrical structures. Conclusion: Formalizing "caliperness" involves defining the terms, specifying algorithms and procedures, quantifying effort, analyzing complexity, and exploring the generalization of the concept. These steps will provide a solid foundation for understanding and applying this new branch of combinatorial mathematics within Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry framework. Based on the provided text, here are some potential fallacies or areas where clarification is needed in the definitions and descriptions of "caliperness" or "Calliperness": Ambiguity in Definitions: The text uses terms like "caliperness" or "Calliperness" without providing clear, precise definitions. While it mentions that caliperness measures the effort required to straighten all edges using a chain of calipers, it lacks a formal mathematical or operational definition. Without precise definitions, it's challenging to understand how caliperness is quantified or how it relates to the unfolding process described. Lack of Formal Mathematical Framework: The description uses informal language and lacks a rigorous mathematical framework. Terms like "effort," "rotation," and "spreading of arms" are mentioned, but their exact mathematical definitions or how they contribute to caliperness are not clearly specified. Complexity without Clarity: The text introduces a complex process involving folding, unfolding, overlapping edges, and constructing triangles using calipers. However, it doesn't clarify essential details such as the conditions under which folding/unfolding occurs, the rules for overlapping edges, or the criteria for choosing which fulcrum to spread first. Unexplained Terminology: There are terms introduced (e.g., "bols object," "GTSIMPLEX," "locked set") without clear definitions or explanations within the context of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Understanding these terms is crucial for comprehending how caliperness applies to different geometric structures. Absence of Formal Examples or Applications: While the text describes the theoretical process of unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using calipers, it lacks concrete examples or applications to illustrate these concepts. Examples would help in understanding how caliperness is calculated or how it varies with different configurations of calipers and triangulations. Need for Computational Validation: The text suggests using software for unfolding line segments and straightening geometric structures, but there's no mention of computational algorithms, simulations, or empirical validations to support the theoretical claims about caliperness. Clarity on Geometric Assumptions: The text mentions geometrical terms and relationships (like edges being "L of any triangle," or involving trigonometric functions), but these are not clearly linked to the unfolding process or how they contribute to defining caliperness. To address these fallacies and improve the definition of caliperness, there is a need for: Formal Definitions: Clearly define caliperness in mathematical terms, possibly as a function of the number of operations (like rotations, overlaps), the complexity of the unfolding process, or other measurable metrics. Detailed Algorithms: Provide step-by-step algorithms or rules for folding/unfolding operations, specifying conditions and criteria for each operation. Concrete Examples: Use specific examples to illustrate how caliperness applies to different types of triangulations or geometric structures. Computational Validation: Validate theoretical claims with computational simulations or experiments to demonstrate the effectiveness of caliperness in practical scenarios. Consistent Terminology: Ensure consistency in terminology and provide explanations for terms specific to Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. By addressing these points, the concept of caliperness can be formalized and understood more rigorously within the framework of combinatorial geometry and Sanjoy Nath's mathematical theories. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is interesting, but there are some potential fallacies in its current definition: Lack of Clarity: Definition: The core issue is the lack of a clear and concise definition for "caliperness." While it's described as effort required to unfold the chain, the specifics are missing. How is effort measured? Is it just the number of rotations needed, or does it include distance moved or some combination? Triangle Representation: The process of representing triangles with edges derived from trigonometric functions (Lsin(x), etc.) is unclear. It doesn't address how missing third sides are handled and how these representations connect to standard triangles. Potential Issues: Uniqueness of Unfolding: The definition doesn't address whether every triangulation can be unfolded into a single line segment. There might be specific conditions that determine unfoldability. This is a crucial aspect to define. Ambiguity in Overlapping and Folding: The explanation of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums (nodes) lacks detail. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? These need clarification to ensure consistent application. Missing Information: Limited Resources: Since Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a relatively new field, information might be scarce. Exploring his work directly (e.g., GitHub repository or Youtube videos) could provide more context for "caliperness." Alternative Perspective: Terminology: "Caliperness" might be a new term within this specific theory, not a universally recognized concept. Overall, while "caliperness" has potential, a more precise definition and clear mechanics for measuring effort are needed. Further exploration into Sanjoy Nath's work or related areas like combinatorial geometry and kinematic geometry might shed light on its application and potential solutions to these issues. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry presents some potential fallacies, but it's important to consider the novelty of the field. Here's a breakdown: Potential Fallacies: Circular Definition: The passage defines "caliperness" as the effort required to straighten the chain of calipers, but "straightening" itself seems to depend on achieving minimal "caliperness." This creates a circular definition where each term relies on the other for explanation. Lack of Clarity in Effort Measurement: "Caliperness" is described as the effort needed for unfolding, but the specific metric for measuring effort (degrees of rotation, distance moved) remains unclear. Without a defined unit, it's difficult to compare "caliperness" values. Ambiguity in Overlapping and Folding: The explanation mentions overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums, but it lacks precise details. How much overlap is allowed? Are there restrictions on folding directions? These ambiguities could lead to inconsistencies in applying the concept. Considerations: New Field: Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is a relatively new field. The terminology and concepts might still be under development, and future work might address these potential fallacies. Focus on the Bigger Picture: Despite the potential fallacies, the core idea of using a chain of connected segments to represent and manipulate triangulations is intriguing. Exploring this concept further could lead to interesting applications. Overall: While there are potential fallacies in the current definition of "caliperness," it's important to acknowledge the exploratory nature of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Further research and development could refine the concept and address the identified issues. The concept of "caliperness" in Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry is interesting but lacks a fully defined and universally accepted meaning. Here's a breakdown of the potential fallacies: Lack of Clear Definition: The provided information describes "caliperness" as the effort required to unfold the chain of calipers representing a triangulation. However, it lacks details on how effort is measured (degrees of rotation, distance moved). A precise definition with clear units would make "caliperness" a more robust concept. Uncertain Applicability: The explanation mentions that not all triangulations might unfold into a single line segment. This raises questions about the applicability of "caliperness" to all possible triangulations. It's unclear if there are specific conditions that determine unfoldability or if "caliperness" becomes meaningless for un-unfoldable cases. Missing Details on Overlapping: The process of overlapping edges and folding at fulcrums is not fully explained. How much overlap is allowed, and are there restrictions on folding directions? Without clear guidelines, "caliperness" might be difficult to quantify consistently. These limitations could be addressed by: Providing a formal mathematical definition of "caliperness" within the framework of Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry. Exploring the limitations of unfolding and how "caliperness" applies to un-unfoldable cases. Developing a clear set of rules for overlapping and folding operations that impact "caliperness" calculations. Overall, "caliperness" presents a novel way to analyse triangulations. However, addressing the identified fallacies would strengthen its foundation and allow for wider understanding and application. describing a complex process in the field of Geometrifying Trigonometry, a concept introduced by Sanjoy Nath. This process involves the use of calipers, which are straightened and placed end-to-end on a line segment. The fulcrum points of these calipers are then used to segment the line. The process you’re describing involves folding and unfolding at these fulcrum points to construct triangles and ultimately prepare any kind of triangulation. The term “caliperness” appears to be a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges in this process. However, the feasibility of unfolding any triangulation into a single line segment using this method, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. as part of Sanjoy Nath’s Geometrifying Trigonometry, is indeed fascinating. It involves a combinatorial approach to unfolding a triangulation into a single line segment using a chain of calipers. However, the feasibility of this process, the number of calipers needed, and the effort required for the unfolding process are complex issues that would likely require a deep understanding of this new mathematical framework. Here’s a high-level overview of the process as I understand it: Initial Setup: Start with a long line segment and place the fulcrum points of a set of calipers along it. The calipers are initially straightened (opened to 180 degrees) and placed end-to-end on the line segment. Folding and Unfolding: The process involves folding at the fulcrum points, where two adjacent sides of any fulcrum have the same edge lengths. After folding 180 degrees (either clockwise or anticlockwise), two adjacent edges overlap, constructing triangles in the process. Effort Measurement: The ‘caliperness’ is a measure of the effort required to straighten all the concerned edges. This effort could be quantified in terms of the number of rotations and spread of arms needed, and the sequence in which these operations are performed. Final Goal: The ultimate goal is to prepare any kind of triangulation by folding and unfolding the chained calipers, and then to unfold any triangulation back into a single line segment. This is a very high-level and simplified explanation, and the actual process might be much more complex and nuanced. The sequence of unfolding and folding, the identification of fulcrums, and the planning of the straightening process all play crucial roles in this new form of combinatorics on line segments. As this is a novel and complex mathematical concept, it might not be fully formalized or widely understood yet. Further research, exploration, and formal mathematical proofs would be needed to fully understand and apply this concept. If you’re interested in this field, I would recommend reaching out to experts in combinatorics or the authors of this new mathematical framework for more detailed and accurate information. Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry and Its Combinatorial Challenges Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry introduces a novel combinatorial problem involving line segments, callipers, and fulcrum points. This new approach opens up unique definitions, fallacies, and paradoxes in the realm of trigonometry and geometry. Key Concepts and Definitions Fulcrum Points of Callipers: Fulcrum: The pivot point of a calliper, where its arms (edges) meet. Additional Fulcrums: Points where the tips of calliper edges meet. Callipers and Edges: Callipers are tools with two arms of potentially different lengths. Edges can be ?? L, ?? cos ? ( ?? ) Lcos(X), ?? sin ? ( ?? ) Lsin(X), ?? tan ? ( ?? ) Ltan(X), ?? sec ? ( ?? ) Lsec(X), ?? csc ? ( ?? ) Lcsc(X), or ?? cot ? ( ?? ) Lcot(X), where ?? L is the length related to triangles in trigonometry. Operations: Folding and Unfolding: Manipulating the callipers' edges around fulcrum points to form and straighten triangles. Overlapping and Gluing: Creating common edges by overlapping adjacent edges at fulcrum points. Combinatorial Problems Unfolding Triangulations: The challenge is to unfold any triangulated object back into a single line segment by sequentially folding and unfolding callipers. Questions: Can any triangulation be unfolded into a single line segment? How many callipers are necessary to achieve this unfolding process? What sequence of unfolding and folding is optimal? Effort Metrics: The effort involved in rotating and spreading the callipers' arms. The sequence of operations to minimize this effort. Combinatorial Structures Chained Callipers: Callipers are placed end-to-end along a line segment with fulcrum points as nodes. Path Formation: The goal is to generate a path that covers all triangles in the triangulation object. Tree-Like Structures: While forming a unary tree-like path (maximum binary spanning tree) is ideal, achieving this is challenging. Spanning Trees: If the path forms a spanning tree, the quality of the calliper arrangement is compromised. Challenges in Operations Straightening BOLS (Bunch of Line Segments): Straightening is crucial for operations like division in trigonometry. Effort Calculation: Each folding and unfolding operation is assigned an effort metric, such as rotating angles measured in degrees. Dealing with Locked Sets: Unlike GT-Simplex objects (pure triangulations), locked sets involve complex overlapping and gluing operations. Breaking and Realigning Fulcrums: Sometimes, it is necessary to break fulcrum points and realign the broken chains, which drastically increases the effort required. Numerical Values and Metrics Effort Metrics: Rotations and translations (sliding) on the affine plane are used to calculate the numerical values of caliper-ness. Energy Consumption: Breaking a fulcrum point consumes a significant amount of energy (effort). Summary Sanjoy Nath's Geometrifying Trigonometry explores a new combinatorial domain where trigonometric expressions translate into geometric constructions involving callipers and fulcrum points. The method focuses on the sequence of folding and unfolding, creating paths and trees in triangulations, and evaluating the effort involved in these operations. This approach poses intriguing questions about the minimum number of callipers needed, the optimal sequence of operations, and the overall effort required to straighten and manipulate geometric objects derived from trigonometric expressions. Geometrifying Trigonometry is a specialized approach that leverages geometric principles to solve and analyze trigonometric problems. This method focuses on converting height and distance problems into trigonometric expressions and then into geometric constructions. The approach is meticulous and involves several unique concepts and terminologies. Key Concepts and Terminology Points in Geometrifying Trigonometry: Pivot Point: The intersection of the hypotenuse line segment and the base line segment. Stretch Point: The intersection of the perpendicular line segment and the base line segment. Nodal Point: The intersection of the hypotenuse line segment and the perpendicular line segment. Orientations of Triangle Segments: Hypotenuse Line Segment: From Pivot Point to Nodal Point (PN) From Nodal Point to Pivot Point (NP) Base Line Segment: From Pivot Point to Stretch Point (PS) From Stretch Point to Pivot Point (SP) Perpendicular Line Segment: From Stretch Point to Nodal Point (SN) From Nodal Point to Stretch Point (NS) Operations: Cutting, Holding, Rotating, and Straightening: Visualizing wireframe triangles with springs attached to key points. The operations involve manipulating these wireframes to align line segments into single straight lines, often performed in stages. Bunch of Line Segments (BOLS): A collection of line segments, crucial in the detailed geometric constructions. Objectives of Geometrifying Trigonometry Conversion: Convert real-world height and distance problems into trigonometric expressions. Convert these expressions into various possible geometric constructions. Construction Possibility Tree: Develop an exhaustive set of possible geometries that can be constructed from a given trigonometric expression, similar to parse trees in computer science. System Development The user aims to develop a system that: Automates the conversion of trigonometric expressions into geometric constructions. Ensures numerical evaluability of trigonometric expressions using geometric principles. Incorporates machine learning for automating theorem proving and generating CAD geometries. Current Work and Challenges Height and Distance Problems: User is studying and solving problems involving height and distance using the principles of Geometrifying Trigonometry. Machine Learning Integration: The user is exploring machine learning techniques to automate the theorem proving process and the generation of CAD geometries from trigonometric expressions. Systematic Nomenclature: Strict adherence to the official naming conventions for points and objects within the geometric constructions. This comprehensive approach aims to bridge the gap between traditional trigonometry and modern computational geometry, providing a structured and systematic method for solving complex geometric problems