#geometry-and-trigonometry
1 messages ยท Page 171 of 1
can anyone help me with geometry?
hi
WATCHU WANT
so here
If triangle MAP is congruent to triangle FUN and the measure of angle M is 90 degrees and the measure of angle P is 40 degrees what is the measure of angle U?
a. 50 b. 90 c. 40 d. 140 e. cant tell
so A right?
Yes
next one
Ask someone else brb
ok
What is it?
@analog dust problem [045]
Whats the deifference between R and R^2...
same thing
This is sad
Rip geometry
I swear how is it that bad its the easiest one!
The formulas are easy
It may look hard with all the "PIr2+(b1,+b2)
Can someone explain to me why the distance from P to -q is r+d and the distance to +q = r-d
It seems so simple but can't figure it out.
@knotty shell Still stuck?
Yeah kinda
kinda
Can you help me out? 
Not really
ok
Well
I'm not sure if there's anymore complications to it
But it looks like r is being treated like a vector
So if you choose your positive direction
which is left
You've got r
Which is all positive in left direction
and then you're going d in the left direction
So there's no negatives
but the other direction
you're going forwards by negative d (backwards)
Yeah
That's why it's negative
Yeah but I don't get why it's r+d and r-d
I get the minus signs
Oh
But why is the length -q -> P for example r+ d
I assumed that -q and q were charges and to do with the other topics here which I'm not really familiar with
From p to -q
That should be -r I think
Because you want to go in the opposite direction
Wait what
But you have -q is further away from P than +q right?
what
Wait
I'm not sure what you're stating
-q looks closer to q than p
but idk if this is to scale
Like if it's not it depends
It can be, or it might not be
Yeah
then +d
You can't just do that right?
Why not
That's a vector that groes from P to the middle of -q and +q and then from there to -q
yes
Which would be longer than the actual vector
No
I want the distance between P and -q
Then you find the magnitude of the resulting vector
I've no idea what these vectors actually are
But being vectors
You can use vector addition like that
Because they're not lengths
um
@shadow anvil nvm I don't get it. Even if these 2 had a 90 degree angle the distance is always gonna scale with a square root since when you take the magnitude it gives you something like $$\sqrt{r^2 + d^2}$$
Which wouldn't be r+ d right?
Well
It's not a distance
It's a vector
If they're distances
Then yes
You need to use some trig
Lmao
But it might be worthwhile trying to imagine it with another value for theta
Just to understand it
I just want to make a distinction too between vectors and vector quantities @knotty shell as I'm now realising that might have been what you meant
is a vector quantity just the magnitude?
No
of a vector
Newtons is a vector
but it's a vector quantity
like 5N
Isn't a true vector
It's linear a vector
but a true vector
I don't really kow what linear in the sense of vector means
=tex \begin{pmatrix}a\cr b\cr c\end{pmatrix}
Well
It's only working in one plane
Like 4n
can only go two directions
positive
and negative
there's no upwards
downwards
back or forwards
or anything like that
But when is something a true vector then?
When it's defined in multiple dimensions?
Yes
Those vectors we need to split up into components
So
=tex \overrightarrow{Pq}=\sqrt{\left(d+r\cos\left(\theta\right)\right)^2+\left(r\sin\left(\theta\right)\right)^2}
fuck
and the first pq should be |pq|
but w/e
that's the length
now theta equals 0
which works in this case
All I've done
Should be -d too
fml
=tex |\overrightarrow{Pq}|=\sqrt{\left(r\cos\left(\theta\right)-d\right)^2+\left(r\sin\left(\theta\right)\right)^2}
Ok there we go
So all I've done
Is taken the sum of horizontal components
for the first part
the horizontal component of r is r*cos(theta)
Because of trig
soh-cah-toa
Then r is only existant in the horizontal plane
so there's no trig just minus r
So that's our horizontal movement from p to q
now the veritcal is the same principle
just the vertical component of r
using trig
now we just use pythagoras
Yes
-q is the same idea
just you will get +d instead of -d
because you're not going back on yourself
and then that will work with any value of theta
Okay thanks
So easy though
hello, I have a question about finding the value of a trig function (sin, cos, etc.) for a given angle. I understand that a triangle is made with the given angle, but I'm not sure how to find the two other acute angles of the triangle in order to find side lengths: take the example of 330 degrees, how would I find the two other angles of the triangle from that?
I know that, 330 degrees is not an angle of a triangle
I have to find the two other acute angles of the right triangle formed from 330 degrees
how do you form a triangle from 330 degrees?
like this
but this page doesn't explain it clearly
which is why I'm asking here
well the axes are at angles 0, 90, 180 and 270
330 passes the bottom axis, so one of the angles is 330-270 = 60
another angle is 90-60 = 30
I got a terrifying problem. Any triangle ABC. BD bisects AC, CE bisects AB, AP is perp to BD, AQ is perp to CE. Prove PQ || BC
Image ?
I don't have it digital
Such a beautiful drawibg
Yep, pretty much
?
AQ/AP don't intersect BC
There is also a point F where BD crosses CE
Ok
The only things I can easily prove is the opposing angles around F are equal and that in APFQ, angles Q and P are both 90. One needs to somehow prove angle BCQ = CQP
Beatifully Barely Readable
@sterile stag where is the problem?
it will help to draw a picture
It's really unclear
idek how to draw this
@hazy delta do u think u can solve this ?
i am not sure how to help, sorry
you must be able to draw a picture
if you cannot do this, it suggests a severe lack of understanding
ok thanks anyways ๐
Okay ill try
anyways you have a trian
The triangle will look like that I believe
So I would find the law of sines to find the distance from the observer to the peg
and then make a triangle with that to find the horizontal distance
@sterile stag
Ok I'll try that
This is the answer I got but it's not the answer in the book
@keen aspen
No that is wrong
You did the second part right
but you didn't use the law of sines correct
$$\frac{\sin(51)}{20}=\frac{\sin(57)}{x}$$
?
where did u get 51 and 57 from
No problem
I am doing the same stuff in my trig class :v
Applications using oblique triangles
probability in geometry 
^
could I theoretically learn geometry using Euclid's Elements
That would be pointlessly difficult
@upper karma pointlessly difficult is my middle name
Its not productive either
Its a slow way of learning
yeah I have all summer
You wont get a better understanding if geometry by reading frok euclid
Dont get that impression
Its way faster and easier to learn from other sources
And
Other texts will give a perspective euclid didnt have
@upper karma I also am gonna get another book just a bit after
Fine
but Euclids elements used to be the number 2 most printed book ever next to the bible
like
it was what people learned from for over two thousand years
people two thousand years ago bled themselves to death to cure disease
help
@bronze harbor still stuck?
nah i got it lol
I mean u can obviously make a bunch of triangles and stuff but I need a fast way :(
Jk that's the wrong question
Here
Okay Iโm gonna try this at home after dinner XD
@waxen gorge I'm not really familiar with these types of problems, so maybe there is another way, but I drew these lines:
The first step is to calculate that $$CF = \sqrt{r^2-1} + \sqrt{3}$$
Then, using the fact that $$GE = DE/2$$, calculate that $$CF = DE \frac{\sqrt{3}}{2} + \sqrt{r^2 - DE^2/4}$$
Then set those two expressions equal to each other and solve for DE
This gives a formula that matches one of the multiple choice options you showed earlier
Sorry my labels don't match yours
@waxen gorge AoPS did have a solution hidden away: https://artofproblemsolving.com/community/c5h595722p3534408
Out of curiosity, when is a class of this type of geometry taught? Highschool? I'm doing calc 3 and I still haven't seen geometry of this complexity.
depends on the classes you take
you can have geometry anywhere from grade 5 to 12 to uni etc
None of my gradeschool geometry or trigonometry classes had problems as complex as the one above. I didn't learn that kind of geometry in a class, really. Usually people learn it separately, by studying the problems from mathematics contests and their solutions. @cyan saffron
Some universities have problem solving clubs which do exactly that.
I think there must be an elegant solution to the problem..
The one on AoPS is pretty elegant @analog dust
cool
@analog dust check it out already >_>
I tried the formula for the solution and plugged it in with the given values in the question and it said the answer was wrong
Yes
Sometimes he messes up the answers
He'll probably notice and fix it during the class
Where are you stuck and what have you tried so far?
@upper karma did u get it already
I'm assuming it was already due uwu
BTW U SHOWED UR TEACHER AGAIN UGH HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL U
@ebon vapor can u delete the plebs image
Heyyo.
Question?
Can someone help me with #89?
B is the correct answer, but I need to learn how to solve it because my teacher expects me to show her solutions. I got that question wrong and I had to re-do it.
Another useful identity is the law of sines: for any triangle with angle measures a, b, and c, with sides of length A, B, and C, where side A is opposite vertex a, side B is opposite vertex B, and side C is opposite vertex c, it can be said that:
$$\frac{sin(a)}{A} = \frac{sin(b)}{B} = \frac{sin(c)}{C}$$
So $$\frac{sin(52)}{(the length not in the picture that i'm not gonna figure out)} = \frac{sin(x)}{6.6cm}$$
Do you mean the law of sines?
Yuh it holds for all triangles in euclidean space
Yes just beware. Of the AMBIGUOUS CASE!!!! Ambiguity may be among the midst of the illuminati.
sine rule maybe?
Law of Cosines
5.2 was the missing side measurement of the opposite side. My bad, @lavish haven
Was the method used by sweetcheaks on my question above the Law of Cosines method? I wasn't sure because idk the formula
Okay so I made the triangle like what sweetcheaks did. But I don't know what to do next using the law of sines. Ik that I have to input, but I'm confused because idk the other two angles for either A, B, or C.
I know that I need to solve to find the other angle, but idk how to do that.
No for that you would use law of sines
Which you have indicated on your paper
When you have an angle with a corresponding side and another piece of given information you use law of sines
If not, then you would most likely resort to the law of cosines
There are multiple cases when using the law of cosines tho
The support post is 12 ft tall. The length of the house is 25 ft. The diagram is a right triangle, with another right triangle dropped from the right angle to the hypoteneuse
^
If you consider the angle at the left side of that triangle...
Then you can use trig identities, and the fact that the two triangles are similar to figure out all the distances.
but i have no idea where to start
all i have is
x * 12 = 12 * 25
i dont think that's correct ;/
You are right. That is not correct.
You know the trig identities, right? SOHCAHTOA?
no...
I'm not really
question, suppose we have a quadrilateral ABCD, DAB & CBA are complementary angles, AD = BC, AB = 50 CM, CD = 20CM, how can I get the area of ABCD
Any diagram...
It'll look like a trapezoid I believe
Yeah, a regular trapezoid with bases 50 and 20
And the bottom two angles are 45ยฐ
Just find the vertical height of the trapezoid to find the area
Just do the tan of it or use your 45 45 90 triangle knowledge to find the height
Bob is standing under the edge of a circular dome. He walks 10 feet from the edge towards the center, looks up and sees the bottom of the dome 50 feet above him. Looking from the edge of the dome heโd been standing under to the opposite end of the dome, his gaze sweeps out a 90โ angle. How far across is the dome?
: a. 260 b. 100 c. 60 d. 250 (all in feet)
Not sure, I'm having troubles understanding the word problem
I think it describes this, but I haven't tried to work through the problem.
Close.
But that doesn't give an answer that is one of the options.
If you assume the vertical only goes to the diameter, and is 50, you -do- get one of the options for an answer.
So, that's probably the right way to look at it. Poorly worded, though.
so what would i end up with?
Find the measure of the angle between the two straight lines whose equations are: 2x=6-3y and x-5=0
<@&286206848099549185>
that looks spectacularly spooky
It's simpler once I explain it
so we have this cyclic quadrilateral, and the centers of the inner circles of the diagonals of the quadrilateral form a shape
I've already realized that it is a rectangle
but I can't prove it
can someone give me any tips?
nd the centers of the inner circles of the diagonals of the quadrilateral form a shape - what does this mean?
if you connect the dots
you get a shape
Ahhh
Ooh yeah - that's spooky
yeah I gotta do it tho
I thought I was close to the answer
so I begged my math teacher to give me 3 extra days
and now I'll bring shame to my family if I fail
I mean all I can think of is to abstract the centers of those circles to some trig relationship and the showing that they must lie on parallel chords.
Bring shame to your family?
Doing hard drugs brings shame to your family, not not being able to do tough geometry questions. That's how you give yourself a complex.
I said it jokingly but I have a feeling my math teacher thinks I'm not smart at all I only work hard for the gains
so I want to prove it with doing the super hard exercises he gives us for A-s that nobody can do
I don't care about A-s I care about my imag
e
Mmm, try to see this is an emotionally exhausting approach. But it's a good problem
guess I'll just stare at it
my theory involves manipulating the central and perimeteral(is that a word?) angles to and see where that takes me
I get too many lines tho
You need to derive the coordinates of those centers or atleast the chords that they lie on.
After that, it's like a couple steps to showing they form a rectangle.
we haven't learned coordinatal geomtry yet
Wat
they teach that in 11th grade here
So you're doing that all with trig?
yes
trying to*
Dayum.

well if anyone has an idea don't be shy ๐
wait
if I have two lines that cross each other, the opposite angles they form are going to be equal right?
Mhmm
I'm doing sth wrong
lemme check in geogebra
it's such a hassle to draw shapes in that thing
Try to get some ratios with thales and thz tangents maybe?
we haven't learned tangents yet so I'm not allowed to use that ๐ฆ
we've only learned that for physics competitions and that's unofficial
So what all can you actually use?
Simson lines
(well the diagonals and the sides too)
angel of view
angle*
umm central and the other angles
you know where AOB <) = 1/2 APB <)
if that makes sense
idk the English word for it unfortunately
cyclic quadrilaterals
mostly that
but those exercises are usually logic based
You know much more geometry than I do ๐
I just know thales and Pythagore ๐ ๐
those are very useful tools
I have a theory now
but it doesn't feel right
Run us through it
let me draw it in paint because my English mathematical dictionary is too lacking to describe it
so I can prove that
the angles described by the same color are equal
if two angles of a rectangle are equal that means they are similar
and that proves something because the center of the inner circle of a triangle always stays in the same place no matter how you change it's sides as long as the two triangles are similar
it is as if I mirrored the similar triangles and then changed their sides
aand
that proves nothing
damn
It's a start.
I have an idea
turns out
all four triangles are similar
and from here if I use the green and the purple angles
that could lead to somewhere
I can appreciate that the opposite triangles are similar.
it's as if I rotated the central points by the green and the purple angles
But I am skeptical that all four triangles are similar.
they always have a red-black angle and a red and a black angle
if I'm correct
Yeah
I was going to point out one diagrammatic inconsistency.
But you were getting somewhere with opposite triangles being similr.
could you explain what diagrammatic inconsistency is? ๐
please
Sure, the two red angles inside one of the triangles are not equal unless the chord in the triangle is parallel to the bisection of the green angle.
Or if the where the two diagonal lines happen to cross is the origin of the larger inscribing circle.
they should be tho should they not
since green=2black
I mean
purple=2black
green=2red
if we only look at two angles
and from there you can go around with that and name every angle red or black or green or purple
can you not?
I'm just intuiting from the diagram.
You have two diagonals that meet right? That gives you a green angle.
Now only if you draw a line that intersects the two diagonals at points the same distance from where they diagonals meet, will you get two equal angles.
This is not necessarily the case with these triangles.
oh of course I'm so stupid
The opposites triangles are similar but the two angles aren't.
indeed
And of that, I am also dubious.
the black and red angles are not at all equal
like nowhere
I messed it up
okay I have no idea ๐
It's a good place to start.
I'd start by proving that the opposite triangles are similar though.
I can't prove it because I made a wrong assumption in the beginning so it's uncertain the two opposite triangles are similar
tho
I could use the fact that the shape is a cyclic quadrilateral
unfortunately I have no idea how to take that notion further
hmmm unless
nope
I mean this is one hell of a problem to tackle with the cyclical geometry.
with only cyclical geometry.
I can use angles of view
and simson lines
but that's pretty much it
we've only started learning about angles and stuff
hmm
I'll think about it until tomorrow, I usually manage to figure out though problems right before I fall asleep
thanks for the help though @upper karma ^^
I still adore your name
You should really look up the tangents to the circles
I've tried drawing your figure with Geogebra and it's very hard to keep up with the tangents things, so it means there are some precise conditions to them
yo, is there a way to calculate the area of a shape that has 4 sides, but neither one is the same?
What measurements about the shape are you given?
Like side lengths and angle measures I mean
well, the angle measures i don't think so, but i have all of the side lenghts, the left side, the right side, the top, and the bottom
I think you need at least one angle measure
actually, i think that all of the angle measures are 90 degrees
Well, if they are all 90 then the shape is a rectangle
well, maybe, but the shape's height isn't the same, for example, on the left side, it is 5, but on the right, its 7
Do you have a picture?
alright, just a sec, here i will make one. Also thanks for taking your time to help me :D
here, something like this
Oh
It's a trapezoid
So
The area
Where the side on the right is b_1
The side on the left is b_2
And the one on the bottom (the same as the distance between b_1 and b_2) is h
The area can be written as
$$A = \frac{b_1 + b_2}{2} \cdot h$$
thanks so much :D
This is only the case when b_1 and b_2 are parallel
And if the bottom side is slanted, then you need the distance between b_1 and b_2 for h
ah, i understand, thanks so much again ^^
sorry to plop in so quickly again, but how do i calculate a triangle's height given that i know it's 3 sides?
sorry this is probably a noob question :P
That's actually something I don't know offhand
alright, after a little bit of digging, i found this : https://www.mathopenref.com/heronsformula.html
this tells the area of a triangle without the height, and this is the solution i was looking for
alright, sorry to blop in again, but how would i calculate the distance between b_1 and b_2?
this has really been bothering me
i can't figure it out at all :(
For any two points fo the form (x1,x2,x3,...,xn)
Every time I keep trying to find sinB, I always get an error
Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?
The answer is supposed to be 95%
@brittle kraken i dont know a lot of english but the number that is inside the sen-1 must be in a range between -1 and 1
If you try to calc the sen-1 of 1.00000001 you're gonna get an error
Well damn
I'm trying to get an angle that is 95 degrees, but I don't know what to do
I've used the law of sines
Let me check...
Follow on, hold on, I'll take a picture of the question itself
I drew that so I could see what law would work
It is supposed to be 95 degrees, but I'm trying to show work
can anyone help with #6... i never learned how to do this
I tried using the law of sines but idk if I did it correctly, since what I've done cannot be converted into an angle
=tex \frac{\sin\left(52\right)}{5.2}=\frac{\sin\left(\theta\right)}{6.6}\\sin\left(\theta\right)=\frac{6.6\sin\left(52\right)}{5.2}\\theta=\sin^{-1}\left(\frac{6.6\sin\left(52\right)}{5.2}\right)
=pup calc \frac{6.6\sin\left(\frac{\pi}{180}*52\right)}{5.2}
Query made by @shadow anvil
Data sourced from Wolfram|Alpha: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=calc+\frac{6.6\sin\left(\frac{\pi}{180}*52\right)}{5.2}
Do more with Wolfram|Alpha Pro: http://www.wolframalpha.com/pro/
Yeah.... I need to get 95 degrees as my angle, but I can't seem to since my calculator always says I got an error.
Can someone help me with this question please?
I did.
Got up to that but I end up getting the same exact thing, not getting the answer that I'm supposed to have
Damn... Sorry to say, but the answer HAS to be 95ยฐ as it was the correct answer when I scanned it.
I mean i think that you cannot do it with las of sines because i'm pretty sure that the sen-1 will never be more than 90 degrees
I see
Does law of cosines work?
I tried it earlier but I get different results.
Dw I threw my work away using law of cosines as a form of frustration lol
<@&286206848099549185> care to help with that please? I'm definitely confused.
@celest obsidian it has to be possible because the answer was generated to be 95ยฐ>
I have
No
What I've done
It does?
I could but my teacher wants specific details in order for myself to move on
:/
Right, thank you
good for u
Can it be CosB btw?
Considering the angle for A is given already
Unless I'm doing this incorrectly
I'm getting .99994 and .620
wat
I'm trying to use the law of cosines, all I'm getting now is weird answers
They don't show errors, but I always get .99999 or .6203
let me 5 min to recall the lay of cosines i'll help
okay
is your calculator set to degrees or radians @brittle kraken
Is that 0109 or 0.09?
0.09
Oh okay thank you
Hahahah you're welcome, i'm sorry in latin America we use the comma instead of dot
It's fine
Also why does the negative symbol move up (it was at the denominator but now it's at the numerator)?
You can move up the negative if it's in the denominator
If you want you can leave the negative symbol in the denominator
You're gonna get the same result
Try using the negative symbol in the denominator
google cosine rule and apply it
What does this mean
hello everybody, i need some help, i have no idea how to calculate the distance between the blue line, and the red line. Please help! [also, the lines are not parrellel]
anybody? please?
yes becase they are 90 degrees that means part of the circle the angles are spanning over is equal to 180 degrees or pi. Therefore it is the diameter of the circle. @full mortar
@copper valve well im given the size of all of the lines, is that enough?
@opal blaze what do you mean?
?
Sorry wrong person @dusk quartz
ah, okay
Well if the black lines are paralell and of the same length. That means the blue line and the red line have the same length.
well, maybe, but how would i calculate the distance between them?
I am unsure if that is possible only given the length of 2 parlell lines.
:(
well, it sadly doesn't have a answer. Since this isn't a quiz, im using this for programming purposes. Also, it depends, since it's for programming purposes, maybe i can try and get the angels of the corners. But would that help?
alright, tell me when you're back
I am in school atm. But if you think of this as vectors you need 2 to creat a new one. @dusk quartz
alrgiht, ping me when u get back
@dusk quartz you need a relation between the two lines.
sorry for being a noob, but can you explain a bit further? sorry again. EDIT: Actually, i got another idea that i can try to solve my problem, thanks larzanda
does the alternate segment theoreum work on all triangles inscribed in a circle?
@wheat bramble ya
how can I proof that two different angles in a circle subtended from the same arc has the same value?
Could I have a few example problems on the formula rhombus, trapezoid, and triangle?
I'm reviewing for a quiz
Hi, do somebody know how to prove this property:
Let be 4 points A, B, C, D, if and only if [AC] and [BD] intersect in their middle then the quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
Since the question concerns how to prove it, I'll take that to mean "What would the structure of such a proof look like?" as I proceed.
It's an if and only if statement, so first break it into two parts.
a) if [AC] and [BD] intersect in the middle, then the quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram.
b) if the quadrilateral ABCD is a parallelogram, then [AC] and [BD] must intersect in the middle.
Very loosely: (Read: There is more rigor to apply here that I'm glossing over.)
a) Suppose I have lines [AC] and [BD], and suppose that they intersect at the midpoint, m, between all points. Now, take the line from m to the line [AB] such that it intersects [AB] at a right angle. If we continue the line in the other direction, note that [CD] is also intersected at a right angle. This shows that [AB] and [CD] are parallel. Do the same for [AD] and [BC] to complete this sub-proof.
b) This is essentially a) in reverse. Start by noting that the parallel lines in the parallelogram are parallel, and find the midpoints for the lines that form the edges of the parallelogram, and then show from those the midpoint of the parallelogram. Finally, show that it's the same as the point where the diagonals intersect.
From here, since will have shown both the if case and the only if case, the theorem will have been proven.
I'll reiterate, this is very loose, and I'm skipping over the algebraic part of it because the question seems directed at the structure of the proof.
Does this help @upper karma ?
I did it by alternate interior angles and similar triangles. ๐
That works too!
Which question?
hey all - i have a set of four points (some sort of quadrilateral) on a 3D plane...is there a way to find a clockwise ordering of these points, about the plane's normal?
I can think of a way to do it, but it's pretty tedious.
Basically pick any three of the four points, and use them to generate an orthogonal basis for the plane. Then transform ABCD into that basis and convert to polar.
Thinking a little more about it, if you pick one point, and take the three difference vectors to the remaining three points...
The magnitude of the cross product divided by the magnitude of the vectors gives you the sin of the angle between them.
I think you could use that to generate an ordering.
Hello, I have following function for shader to draw a cone:
p is Vector3 of xyz of starting point, not sure what c stands for exactly.
Could someone enlighten me of how to properly edit c?
If I change c[0] it changes the narrowness of cone, but c[1] affect it also
I don't have enough information to guess what this is doing. Sorry
@zenith ember yep, the signed angle method is what i ended up doing..a bit tedious, as you said, but works!
thank you!
yw
Hey Iโm not in geometry is the answer 54?
I think it is because 26+82=108
and 180-108 = 172
I mean 72*
So angle b is 72
And then
180-72=108
108/2=54
=pup solve 54*2
Query made by @upper karma
Data sourced from Wolfram|Alpha: http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve+54*2
Do more with Wolfram|Alpha Pro: http://www.wolframalpha.com/pro/
Ok I think I got it
Rendering failed. Check your code. You can edit your existing message if needed.
What do I have to do to solve this?
Do I need to follow a theorem or something?
Is the answer C?
Yeah I doubt it has a theorem, thanks btw.
what equation are you starting with?
I started with 84.5 - 5x = 642 + 20x, then turned it into 84.5 - 25x = 642
I tried going the other side to make it 84.5 = 642 + 25x, but I get the same result
are you multiplying the sides on the same triangle?
Oh
I followed the example that was given to me online
http://prntscr.com/j88iq3
http://prntscr.com/j88imj
oh I see
But to no avail with a valid answer lol
you're not combining the fraction correctly
Ah
you cross multiplied wrong
Oh
if what I'm saying
np
well what do you need to be able to uniquely define a triangle?
Theorems/postulates?
I would sub in the 1/2(e^x + e^-x) formula for cosh
how would i log a sum of (e^x + e^-x)?
actually, how do you log something simpler like this?
=tex 2^3 + 2^4
You don't.
@stoic adder I assume the inscribed triangle is equilateral?
yes
Ok. Lemme work on it a bit.
@stoic adder So, fundamentally, this problem comes down to one of similar triangles.
ok
What you're trying to show is that the radius of the larger circle is twice the radius of the smaller circle.
The radius of the larger circle is DC
And the radius of the smaller circle is DA_1
Following me so far?
yeah
Ok.
So the most interesting triangle is DCA_1
And you can show, pretty easily, that DCA_1 is a 30-60-90 right triangle.
Which means that DC is twice DA_1.
And you're done. ๐
This is my problem
?
I have a fan that is 4.7 x 4.7. Height is no issue. These fans need to be equally spaced across a block of aluminum with the remader of free space in-between each fan. Meaning the 2 most outer fans would be parallel vertically with the ends of the block.
The block is 24 inches long
does that make since?
@rugged moat yay can help (let's bring question here as the other channel is busy)
Mad scientist is here to help ๐
naag sry @mortal briar that's another question
I am here
but you can ping Helpers so that helpers will notice your question @mortal briar
well $$\dfrac{|b|}{|c|}$$ is what you want right?
but what is $$|c|$$
or actually $$|c|^2$$
it's $$c\cdot c$$
but $$c=a+b$$
so this becomes $$(a+b)\cdot(a+b)$$
expand & Eurรชka
Ummm what just happend?
<@&286206848099549185>
I have a fan that is 4.7 x 4.7. Height is no issue. These fans need to be equally spaced across a block of aluminum with the remader of free space in-between each fan. Meaning the 2 most outer fans would be parallel vertically with the ends of the block.
The block is 24 inches long
@rugged moat things like $$(x+y)z=xz+yz$$
a2 +b2+2ab?
same for b
how do you calculate the 'minimum' tangent for a given point?
from a line that extends from the middle of a circle
Confused
how high does the line that goes straight up need to be to have diect line of sight with a point at 40 degrees
What is your answer in terms of? Radians?
Doesn't look like you were given any units
the radius is 2000
40 / 90 is .44....
so i took
44 percent of 2000
is 880
so the slope is the ratio of 880 over 2000
Do you know the relations of side lengths with secant lines?
@keen aspen Nope.
(A+B)*B=(C+D)*D
Cool. Now how is that applyable to Question 5?
(5+4)*4=(ZC+2)*2
Angle BMN=1/2(AP-BN)
12=1/2(AP-33)?
yes
@ocean quartz Back to your problem
so I edited the question where I explained furthur things I understood
no one answered me, but someone commented but couldnt' find his ideas helpful
never mind
so at the end
for your algorithm
given any $$\alpha$$ and $$\beta$$
you can determine $$r$$ as follows
secondly
once this condition is satified
you consider the function
$$f(x)=\beta-x\pi+x\arctan\left(\dfrac{\sqrt{(\alpha-x)^2-x^2}}{x}\right)$$
this function will have exactly one solution
that you can approximate using numerical methods
the easisest method is this:
@upper karma thank you very much! I actually just finished. I'll make a demo in a moment.
Probably will look broken in discord. Should work normally in browser.
@upper karma @upper sedge here is the loop I used, as promised: https://pastebin.com/ha8pTXWB
It's a shame I wasn't able to google proper implementation (looked for "binary search" instead of "bisection method"), so I stopped once it started to output proper result.
@upper karma also I used yesterday's formula. Maybe will redo with later one.
http://prntscr.com/j8yqos
For that kind of question, do I have to find a triangle that looks identical to the one above?
do you know what similar means?
Not in mathematical terms lol
For similar triangles ABC~DEF, with sides a,b,c and d,e,f respectively, they usually use stuff like:
a/d=b/e comparing the ratio of 2-2 sides of the different triangles, but can you use a/b=d/e for e.g? Checking the ratio of 2 sides in each triangle?
@brittle kraken look up what a similar triangle is in geomtry
and make sure you can make the distinction
between a similar triangles and congruent triangles
@fallow quail yes. in fact, given you know you can use a/d=b/e, you can get to ae=bd, which means a/b=d/e
Ah, right, thank you. Just the fact that my math book always used only one of those, kinda confused me
Jazza - Today at 10:09 PM
@Kyle look up what a similar triangle is in geomtry(edited)
and make sure you can make the distinction
between a similar triangles and congruent triangles(edited)```
Okay, so in using the information I got from similar triangles here:
https://www.varsitytutors.com/hotmath/hotmath_help/topics/similar-triangles
My answer is A, right? since the shape is scaled down from its actual size
Two triangles are said to be similar if their corresponding angles are congruent and the corresponding sides are in proportion. In other words, similar triangles are the same shape, but not necessarily the same size.
Or is it B?
You need to either have all 3 sides of the triangle be proportional to each other, or 2 sides and an angle between them being the same
Neither A or B has that
27/8 does not equal 45/19 and 15/6 does not equal 30/19
@brittle kraken
I see
Alright. And this should be A right? since the scale factor is 5/4.
http://prntscr.com/j8z7po
45/36 = 50/40 = 40/32 all scaled up to 5/4
Yep
@ocean quartz Oh nice animations!
Shenzao RIP you were pinged xD
look ahead
oh notice that when alpha groes, sure r groes as well
Ah, I see the tag.