KerimF
Advanced Member level 5
- Joined
- May 17, 2011
- Messages
- 1,556
- Helped
- 376
- Reputation
- 760
- Reaction score
- 379
- Trophy points
- 1,373
- Location
- Aleppo city - Syria
- Activity points
- 13,106
Hi All,
I don't think we will disagree on the right definition of parallelism (though it may differ a little bit when applied to different situations).
On the other hand, it seems since we are now mature persons, we like to forget that we were once upon the time... just little kids. So on purpose or not all here try to miss the main idea of the first question which reminds us that a baby is not a kid and a kid is not a teenager... etc.
I doubt someone here is/was able teaching his baby about when two lines become parallel, by presenting him any definition said so far on this thread.
Why it is impossible to do it?
Isn’t he a real human creature?!
The answer is that our brain needs time to perceive the details of reality as they are, and the process of learning should be made progressively.
Imagine we are talking to a 8-9 year kid about the notion of infinity. He may listen to us and even pretend to fully understand it, but surely it won’t be the way we (mature people) perceive it.
So while the definition on the post #1 is (should be) given deliberately as incomplete (hence wrong scientifically) to our little kids, it is a ‘great’ step for them toward the acquisition of the complete knowledge. Many here may not fully understand what I am referring to because it is very hard for a mature person to imagine how he/she really was when kid ;-)
When I was a teenager (perhaps a bit earlier), there was a need to go deeper in analysing our universe. The spatial geometry was introduced. So it was time to update the first incomplete definition:
Two straight lines are said parallel if they don’t intersect... and are on the same plane.
And it was the next great step toward perfection in knowledge
I thought it was the most complete definition about parallelism but its weakness didn’t show up till I grew up and needed to draw perspective pictures to present real views on a piece of paper (perspective geometry)..........
Kerim
I don't think we will disagree on the right definition of parallelism (though it may differ a little bit when applied to different situations).
On the other hand, it seems since we are now mature persons, we like to forget that we were once upon the time... just little kids. So on purpose or not all here try to miss the main idea of the first question which reminds us that a baby is not a kid and a kid is not a teenager... etc.
I doubt someone here is/was able teaching his baby about when two lines become parallel, by presenting him any definition said so far on this thread.
Why it is impossible to do it?
Isn’t he a real human creature?!
The answer is that our brain needs time to perceive the details of reality as they are, and the process of learning should be made progressively.
Imagine we are talking to a 8-9 year kid about the notion of infinity. He may listen to us and even pretend to fully understand it, but surely it won’t be the way we (mature people) perceive it.
So while the definition on the post #1 is (should be) given deliberately as incomplete (hence wrong scientifically) to our little kids, it is a ‘great’ step for them toward the acquisition of the complete knowledge. Many here may not fully understand what I am referring to because it is very hard for a mature person to imagine how he/she really was when kid ;-)
When I was a teenager (perhaps a bit earlier), there was a need to go deeper in analysing our universe. The spatial geometry was introduced. So it was time to update the first incomplete definition:
Two straight lines are said parallel if they don’t intersect... and are on the same plane.
And it was the next great step toward perfection in knowledge
I thought it was the most complete definition about parallelism but its weakness didn’t show up till I grew up and needed to draw perspective pictures to present real views on a piece of paper (perspective geometry)..........
Kerim