Dear Banks
My representation is still appropriate to its meaning and yours would be two of a much smaller size and one would not be a triangle but a parallelogram or at the very least not an equalateral triangle
Thanks,
C. Carl McConnell
My representation is still appropriate to its meaning and yours would be two of a much smaller size and one would not be a triangle but a parallelogram or at the very least not an equalateral triangle
Thanks,
C. Carl McConnell
If you let a triangle represent a perfect set of rules, you could still cut it in half and have two triangles. :thumbup:
Last edited: