Dear Professor David or Jo Anne Ryeburn,
Finally,
I accomplished the study
of this most interesting article...
But, with your permission,
I can not resist to notice that
the key-point of the surprising,
at least to me, introduction
of an ellipse at step (3),
it looks somehow artificial
and in some way opposite
to the intentions of the introduction:
| ...
| don't believe in using calculus
| whenever simple geometry and/or algebra
| makes it unnecessary.
| A proof that avoids calculus can be meaningful for
| those who don't know calculus,
| or who haven't used it for a while
| ...
In all other respects
and as far as I could say something more,
then it is, at least for me,
a perfect argument, indeed!
Sincerely yours,
pez
SV7BAX
TheDAG
|