How smart are you, /b/?

30*

Its 30° my lad

purpke

>>735496663
it is 55° my friends, 100% positive, just aint going to tell you how i found it. well i might in an hour if no one else does kekeke

x=x
boom i win

>>735496663

It's 35 retards.

i got 20. did i do good sir?

40°
Easy

>>735498370
believe me, it is not easy. it takes a lot of steps and a little out of the box thinking. it's 55 for sure kek

>>735498488
Believe me. I am not as stupid as you might think.

Ok this is kind of funky, not sure if I'm right because I don't do this often, because I'm PRETTY sure the answer is 80. Those half circle marks in the angles, yeah, both add up to 80, so I'm pretty sure that means x is the same thing.

>>735498541
you are wrong and i will prove it.
>>735498698
is this a joke or are you serious?

>>735498488
can you explain how you got that solution ? cuz for reasons i think he gave us too less information

File: 1497203265905_solved.jpg (38KB, 309x442px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 309x442px

All green angeles added must be 180°. Same for all blue angles

File: 1496793056484.png (85KB, 500x294px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 500x294px

>>735498698

File: wrong.jpg (51KB, 482x377px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 482x377px

>>735499415
Bullshit

File: 1497203265905_solved.jpg (39KB, 309x442px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 309x442px

Forgot one agle

>>735499639
nope, not true

File: 1497203265905.jpg (36KB, 309x442px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 309x442px

This is all I could do, I have no idea on how to find the rest 2 of them.

>>735499415
And why?

>>735499415
wrong
nice try though

>>735499983
same here

>>735496663
>How smart are you, /b/?
Not very, tbh.

>>735499415
>>735499639
This

>>735500255
Me too someone pls say What's the next step

40°

My guesses are:
x=40
x=80
I have no idea on how you got to 55, can you please post the way you resolved it?

The other angle in x triangle is also 70 as it has to make 180 with the 110° angle in top left triangle where it intersects the other 70 in x triangle. Same plain

Trick question, not enough information provided.

Verify that by adding it to the 50° + 20° and then x has to be 40 in the bottom half triangle

File: 1497025861063.jpg (855KB, 1440x2560px) Image search: [Google]

855KB, 1440x2560px

>>735500719

>>735501029
hope i make u fags happy now

>>735496663
the solution is 30°

File: Screenshot_20170609-152940.png (1MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1080px

X can literaly be any number as long as when its added to the missing angle on the bottom right will result in a total of 110.
For example, it can be 30 as long as the other missing angle is 80.
It can also be 40, as long as the other missing angle is 70.
You can check for yourself that it can work. And since i cant find a way to get an actual value for the missing angle, i think op might be duping us.
Either that or im just dumb.

>>735501359
>im just dumb
This

File: 1489923735724.png (64KB, 658x901px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 658x901px

>>735501620
Ok

>>735501029
Reposting the "solution" that was proven to be bullshit the last time this puzzle was posted, nice work faggot

>>735498907
>you are wrong and i will prove it.
I am still waiting

>>735501029
>x+y=160
wrong

>>735502918
they do

>>735503233
Sry, was my fault. But in your solution the two angles 35 and 75 could also be 36 and 74. How do you know that your solution is correct? Keep this in mind
>>735499415
>All green angeles added must be 180°. Same for all blue angles

>>735499622
No bullshit

There's no way to isolate x from the other unknown angle (y). Every equation you can come up with will boil down to x+y=110, so you can't solve it with mathematics. Go find a protractor.

>>735503863
>There's no way to isolate x from the other unknown angle (y)
There is for sure
>>735499415
>All green angeles added must be 180°. Same for all blue angles

>>735504009
There is indeed, though that attempt at a solution is horseshit

>>735504247
Can you proof me wrong? Can you give a negative example pls?

>>735504358
Can you prove your claim that all the green and blue angles have to add up to 180° each?

>>735496663
60

File: angle.png (33KB, 536x540px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 536x540px

Here, it's measured in Autocad. But still no idea how to solve it.

69 https://youtu.be/xP5MfjW9TuU

>>735505697

wrong

>>735496663
Smart enough to not do other people's homework for them.

>>735506083
No it's not.
I just DRAW the bloody lines and measure it. It may be cheating, but it's not wrong

>>735499983
>>735500255
>>735500565
Same over here

>>735506272

wrong

>>735506272

Almost always, these images are drawn with angles that aren't actually to scale. Unless it's ninety-degree angle (Which are generally marked as such), they're not just things you can measure and get the correct answer for.

>>735506631
not>>735505697
but i also work with CAD, he is right

>>735507177
if he did it correctly he did the math for all those angles we already know and then inserted them in the software, not the image... that would be retarded

it is impossible to find out unless you measure the lines' lengths

Why are you wasting your time, by trying to solve an unsolvable puzzle?

>>735507760
jesus christ, it's not unsolvable, it's 30

>>735507905
How to solve without measuring?

>>735507954
First one to figure it out, congratz

Sum of all angles inside triangle is always 180 deg.

>>735507954
Jesus, you had to use cosine to do it?

ass a kekistani ill have to go við 42...... butt in fo reals its 40 you cum drinking faggots

>>735507954
many people said it was thirty>>735508138

File: clap.jpg (40KB, 635x443px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 635x443px

>>735508141

>>735508487
Because they cheated or guessed, that's not figuring it out.

>>735508443
I used law of cosines and law of sines to solve this. It's basic geometry.

File: 1496214457016.jpg (31KB, 476x349px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 476x349px

You don't even need to use the triangle on the left

>>735508573
When you have 2 left to solve, it gets kinda obvious, clearly x = 30°

File: solve.jpg (44KB, 309x442px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 309x442px

60

>>735508848
And yet no one posted a correct solution until >>735507954

File: Prove_me_wrong.jpg (34KB, 309x442px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 309x442px

>>735509020

>>735509315
Perfect example of just posting a guess with no explanation or calculation of how the angles were figured out. That's not a solution.

>>735507954
Thank you!
Also proves that >>735505697 was right

A submission without a proof is just an opinion... Trumpfags

>>735509504

Its not a guess faggot. Its called geometry.

All triangles have a sum of 3 angles equal to 180 degrees. By this logic, you can determine the third unknown angle if you already know 2 of them. This gives you 70 degrees for the middle, top angle. Another rule of geometry states that the inverse of one angle at an intersection of 4 angle will be equal to that angle (ie, the inverse angle for the middle, top angle is also 70 degrees)

You then keep making new triangles from the geometric shapes where you know two of the 3 angles. This is basic shit you learn in 5th fucking grade man.

>>735510452
It's basic math up until the bottom two angles of 30° (x) and 80°. Finding the vales for those is more difficult, and you have failed to show how you did it. Come back when you have an actual solution, retard.