This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 84

Thread images: 31

Thread images: 31

You should be able to solve this.

>>

Give me a moment to check my notes.

>>

>>160699667

>tfw being a NEET for so long has destroyed your ability to do HS-level work

>>160699892

Never gets old.

>>

>>160701065

Recent college grad studying for the GRE and I'm actually amazed at how bad I am at high school math. Shit's pedantic as fuck

>>

>>160701544

Well math is naturally pedantic, anon. Good luck on the GRE, and enjoy your NEETdom afterwards.

>>

>>160699667

You should be able to solve this.

>>

>>160701907

Wtf

>>

>>160699667

At some point I did remember how to do this but then I realized I had no idea what I was solving other than a math puzzle that served no purpose what so ever. And so is the general state of higher math in school.

>>

BEHOLD, THE THREAD DESTROYER.

>>

>>160701907

What was /a/'s reaction to that?

>>

>>160702209

What's elementary geometry?

>>

>>160702209

isn't this one literally impossible?

>>

>>160699667

I can't read squiggly

>>160701907

Z is North, X is East, Y is North-East

>>

>>160702209

120 degrees

>>

>>160702312

It's possible but the angle values given make it impossible. A triangle's interior angles have to add up to 180 degrees. However the numbers given throw that requirement out the window. Once that requirement is gone; the formulas no longer work. You'd get two or three answers where there's meant to be one.

>>

>>160699667

Only a fool couldn't handle such simple math.

>>

>>160702209

Assuming that AB and DE are parallel lines, it would be 70°, otherwise I have no idea.

>>

>>160703879

>Assuming that AB and DE are parallel lines

Why would they?

>>

>>160703932

Dunno, that's why you assume things.

>>

>>160703962

You don't just assume things to solve questions like that.

>>

>>160704026

Okay, for a moment they looked parallel to me, and got a flash.

No bully please.

>>

>>160704073

The third angle with 60 and 70 is 50 degrees yet looks more than 90. The angle to either side of it on the same line are 130 degrees but look like 70. This is why you don't assume

>>

>>160702209

110

>>

>>160699667

What's the first question even asking?

If we're supposed to solve for x, we can't because that's not a fully formed equation. It needs to be equal to something.

>>

>>160704951

Simplify the expression.

I know that you really wanted to impress people by showing that you know an equation needs equal signs but you should have thought about it a tiny bit more.

>>

>>160702209

>>160702312

>>160703322

the question and answer are both readily available on the first page of google results, you fucking retards

>>

>>160705734

but there's no answer

nice try at being cool, fag

>>

>no one solved these simple problems

>tfw /a/ is brainlet board

>>

It's been a while but I think this is right.

>>

>>160702209

alpha and angle BDE sum to 130 is as far as you can get, there are infinite solutions

>>

>>160702209

I have no clue how get the missing two angles

>>

>>160706848

It's been tried over and over again. You have to guess the answer and try to get the remaining angles that way.

>>

>>160706159

Why did you think any different?

>>

>>160699667

What is with this child level math?

>>

>>160703437

Enlighten us, then, O wise one.

>>

>>160701065

That's not even HS level. That's some primary school shit. Kids that are 10 years old can do it.

>>

>>160710341

This is for 13-14 year olds

>>

>>160706848

That's because the picture lies to you.

Look at them fucking angles.

>>

>>160702210

Lots and lots of shit posting. Some math posting. General bemusement. That was before the malaise of the actual show set in.

>>

>>160703879

>implying parallel lines exist

>>>/x/

t.Gauss

>>

>>160702312

>>160702209

It actually is mathematically provable to be impossible

look at >>160706848

check the value of what should be γ (the angle at C). Anon here gave it the value 20 because he constructed a rectangle with E,D, C and the intersection between EA and BD. However, when you construct a large triangle ABC, the angle should be 80° to make the sum of all angles 180°.

The question can't be answered with the values given here.

>>

>>160706848

Should have stopped here. Fuck that image.

>>

>>160712131

No, it is not. It is possible to get the answer and prove it mathematically. You just can't solve it by relying on systems of linear equations only.

>>

>>160702209

>>160702265

>>160702312

>>160703311

>>160703879

>>160703999

>>160704879

>>160705734

>>160706565

>>160706848

>>160711168

>>160712131

all you have to do is assign any length to a side and go from there

the answer is~~20~~

>>

>>160712290

It's common practice to not have the image make sense for the angles given so that

a) You can reuse the same image and just stick in different values

b) Some lazy students can't just measure the answer

>>160712635

Are you literally retarded? This has nothing to do with the solving method, if the angles don't add up, it's completely impossible for the given values to add up to something.

Also this has absolutely nothing to do with linear equations, this is geometry.

>>

>>160712808

Pfft.

Literal amerifat common core shit spreading nonsense to the more intelligent youth.

>>

>>160712814

Even if you didn't have the idea to solve it by elementary geometry (and you are too lazy to find the solution on internet), you can still solve it by trigonometry. So, it is still not "is mathematically provable to be impossible".

>>

>>160712941

If you prefer you can do it without actually calculating the values and end up with a long equation. I heard bitches love long equations.

>>

>>160713040

>bitches

Yep, c/p americuck learning new words.

What a wonderful society we live into.

>>

>>160712131

>>160712814

https://www.duckware.com/tech/worldshardesteasygeometryproblem.html

Why didn't you just like, google it? You're baiting me aren't you.

>>

>>160714551

the "drawing parallel lines" argument is fallacious because he, without a solution doesn't know where (relative to other points) the new point (F) in his examples will fall. If F falls on either side of E, the equations used will change. By linear systems the problem has 4 unknown variables and a system of rank 3. Any solution will work so long as it's orthogonal to the systems nullspace, ie that (\alpha + CDE) - (BDE + CED) = 0

Essentially, he's using a not-to-scale image to wrongly impose extra restrictions on the solution space.

>>

>>160711936

laughed more than I should have

>>

>>160701907

Quaternion?

>>

>>160702112

Back in high shcool used to get some projects or questions applicable to a familiar application to maintain some semblance of sanity.

Like figuring out the optimal path a butterfly would travel in the wind, or angles required by a cannon to hit a moving target, etc...

I am shit at maths myself but do find it fun on occasion when working on problems you might encounter in practice.

>>

>>160715092

There is only one way to construct the triangle fulfilling all the conditions required (in Euclidean geometry). If any solution will work, the easiest way to show it is to show alternative diagram. But, I really doubt you can do it.

>>

>>160716087

I want to believe you because I can't immediately discredit trig-based (arbitrary fixed length) approaches. The trig-less approach is infinite solutions though.

>>

>>160716214

If the trig-based approach shows that there is only one solution, then there is only one solution even if one goes trig-less approach.

>>

>>160702209

>>160703879

The actual solution.

>>

>>160707607

Iteration is a shit tier method~~that I had to use to much in chemistry~~

>>

File: thats_not_why_I_studied_engineering.jpg (97KB, 376x547px) Image search:
[iqdb]
[SauceNao]
[Google]

97KB, 376x547px

>>160712131

>when you construct a large triangle ABC, the angle should be 80° to make the sum of all angles 180°.

I think you made a mistake somewhere because γ = 20° is correct for both cases

>>

>>160701544

I finished civil engineer like 4 years ago and I'm amazed at how useless I am without a calculator

>>

>>160718303

>civil

>useless

>amazed

>>

You shouldn't be able to solve this.

>>

>>160702209

checkmate Langley fags

>>

>>160702209

This artist should be shot Jesus fucking Christ.

>small difference in size between 70° and 10°

>130° angles drawn as acute angles

>50° drawn as obtuse

>30° angle close to a right angle in size

Everything is so fucking off visually

>>

At least no one posted any Kurisu board problems

>>160711936

underrated

>>

>>160719648

70deg is literally smaller than the 60deg.

>>

>>160719876

>>160719648

If it's a math problem, the illustration is just an abstraction.

>>

>>160719648

The problem has nothing to do with the artist

>>

>>160705734

>The angles of a triangle add up to 180

>60+60+70=180

>>

>>160721552

Are you dumb?

>>

>>160721584

Yes, Anon, I am dumb for pointing out the flawed logic in someone else's solution

>>

>>160721913

There is no triangle with angles 60, 60 and 70?

>>

You should be able to solve this

>>

>>160721935

Not on a flat plane.

>>

>>160722067

There isn't one in the image I meant. That 70 obviously refers to the angle between the black lines.

>>

>>160721985

I can, is calc hard now?

>>

>>160721985

I don't even see a shaded area

>>

>>160721985

stop posting your high school cal 1 homework on /a/.

Thread posts: 84

Thread images: 31

Thread images: 31

If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.

This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.