Student: "Hey, a shortcut! Let me first just walk around the long way so I can measure the length of the other two sides, multiply those lengths by themselves, add them together, and find out how much extra walking I've saved myself by taking the shortcut. Boy, this shortcut sure is saving me a lot of effort. Hooray Pythagoras!"
There's a college in Chicago, i think it's IIT maybe, that used aerial photography to map out the student cow paths, then they redid all the sidewalks to incorporate those paths.
Edit: they ended up adding a building in a grassy area and maintained all the hall/walkways of the building in line with the sidewalks/cowpaths. Kinda neat.
I love this type of urbanism. Some cities also study how cars behave in winter by looking at the tracks in the street, and they realized cars actually needed much less room on street corners than they thought.
I wish I was taught about the usefulness of maths growing up. When I did A-level with differentition and integration I quickly forgot as I didn't see a point in it.
At about 35 someone mentioned diff and int are useful for loan repayment calculations, savings and mortgages.
In the US it's common to give students "word problems" that describe a scenario and ask them to answer a question that requires applying whatever math they're studying at the time. Students hate them and criticize the problems for being unrealistic, but I think they really just hate word problems because because they find them difficult. To me that means they need more word problems so they can actually get used to thinking about how math relates to the real world.
Ehh I wouldn't say variables in programming are all that similar to variables in algebra.
In a programming language, variables typically are just a name for some data. Whereas in algebra, they are placeholders for unknown values.
You say that but they still need to teach you the "why". For example I did A-level maths which was a door to learning discrete maths in uni. Matrices, graphs, etc.
In 20yrs as a software dev I never used any of it. Only needed basic arithmetic.
To this day I've got no bloody clue what the point of matrices are.
I do some 8-bit coding and only last month realized logarithms allow dirt-cheap multiplication and division. I had never used them in a context where floating-point wasn't readily available. Took a function I'd painstakingly optimized in 6502 assembly, requiring only two hundred cycles, and instantly replaced it with sixty cycles of sloppy C. More assembly got it down to about thirty-five... and more accurate than before. All from doing exp[ log[ n ] - log[ d ] ].
Still pull my hair out doing anything with tangents. I understand it conceptually. I know how it goddamn well ought to work. But it is somehow the fiddliest goddamn thing to handle, despite being basically friggin' linear for the first forty-five degrees. Which is why my code also now cheats by doing a (dirt cheap!) division and pretending that's an octant angle.
Having the knowledge just gives you fancy words for the resulting coincidental shape.
Isn't that basically all of physics? Just an abstract concept to describe something that sort of fits the rules we extrapolated from observations so far.
I think this is more a case of the triangle inequality in metric spaces, as you don't have to calculate any particular edge to see the shortcut, as well as that it applies to any even non-rectangular triangle.
But if you want to know your saving, you will need to dust off the old formula. And if you do, you find the maximum saving to be around 41% (in the case of isosceles right triangle where the hypotenuse is a factor of sqrt 2 shorter).
I guess your not a carpenter and you don't build things? It's super useful. I don't use it all that often but it's an excellent tool to have. Even just laying out a square garden, say. It also works with any multiple to make bigger perpendiculars, 6, 8, 10 or 15, 20, 25