Drawing parallel lines without a ruler can be hard. Here, i show you how with just a straightedge and a compass. (NO RULERS)

The first thing you do is draw a straight line. It can be any length. Then draw a point above the line.

Simpler method- make two circles of equal diameter, centered on the first line segment. Then, put a point at the most extreme edge of those circles on the same side of the line. Draw a line segment through those two points, so that it is tangential to the two circles and parallel to the other line segment.

Impressive publishing waterfall event.<br><br>Parallel line segments is the description you should be talking about.<br><br>Any math teacher will tell you a line goes to + and - infinity.<br><br>Your reader,<br><br>A

Yeah. You bring up an interesting point, but the definition of parallel lines is, two lines that have the same slope but a different Y-intersect. Which means that even lines going on forever will still be parallel. And if you are talking about the fact that only segments are drawn than you must understand that infinities do not exist in nature so it would be impossible to draw. The segments that are drawn represent the theoretical concept of infinite lines using arrows (which can be seen on the final step).

The axiom in non-Euclidian Geometry is that parallel lines intersect at infinity.

But infinities do not exist in the natural world so it is irrelevant.

Not to my lack of understanding ;-)<br> <br> Even Einstein speaks to infinity ;<br> "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity;<br> and I'm not sure about the the universe."

Even so infinities do not exist outside of the conceptual world, other wise the problems of getting infinities as solutions to equations for quantum gravity would not be a problem. Either way geometric constructions are part of Euclidean Geometry, so the axiom for non-Euclidean geometry may not apply.

<u>And further so</u>, as a Electronic Engineer and Scientist I use "i" which is the representation of the square root of minus one (-1)<sup>½</sup> ...<br> That is an <strong>imaginary</strong> number used in Real-World electrical solutions.<br> <br> You are polite and young man of 14 still to go through a lot<br> of matriculation, Allow me to suggest a modicum of open<br> mindedness about our Wonderful World and high level concepts. <br> Do you know there are more scientific papers of note being produced<br> and published then any one person can review in a lifetime.<br> <br> Infinity is a fun target after a googleplexing some numbers.

wow you are very cool! I have been waiting for a very long time to have a conversation about math like that. I accept defeat. I think that open mindedness is something that I need to work on. thank you for the advice, and for having this conversation with me. I hope we can discuss this type of thing again sometime.

It was fun.<br>I am still liking your very clear, succinct and correct definition of parallel lines,<br>better then I remember in my geometry class ages ago.

I agree with Higgs. Thanks for pointing this out, and no hard feelings.

The more I think about the axiom you said, the more it seems to make sense. if the lines had a known different slope they would intersect at a finite distance, but if they had the same slope it would take an infinite distance for them to intersect.

That is very true

Although lines go on forever, they would still be parallel. Both line segments and lines can be parallel.