>>11457362why do you just reply for the sake of replying when you are obviously clueless?
euclidean geometry is strictly 2 dimensional , and fails at 3 dimension or higher, not only does it not contain any reference to the term "dimension" or similar, it is simply a collection of very concrete (read: non abstract) "proofs" and constructions that you can do in real life with a ruler and compass
when euclid talks about the pythagorean theorem, he doesn't use multiplication, instead he sees it as a problem of adding 2 areas (squares) together
it's not the same as when you write the function x^2+y^2=z^2 on a piece of paper , because then you are using functional math, which the ancient greeks were uncapable of (the first functional math was performed by indians)
