help

[jovial garnet]

Value of X

[hoary vine]

1. Wait patiently for a helper to come along.
2. Once someone helps you, say thank you and close the thread with:

+close

3. Feel free to nominate the person for helper of the week in #helper-nominations
4. Do not ping the mods, unless someone is breaking the rules.
5. If you're happy with the help you got here, and the server overall, you can contribute financially as well:

[jovial garnet]

All I could do

[jovial root]

the two triangles have parallel sides as denoted by the line, thus the angles should be equal iirc?

so you can do 110+2x=180

[jovial garnet]

So X = 35?

[jovial root]

i believe so

[jovial garnet]

Alright thanks

[grim pewter]

@jovial garnet has given 1 rep to @jovial root

[jovial root]

no worries

[olive rose]

How do you know they are parallel?

[jovial root]

the little line

[olive rose]

Doesnt that mean equal length

[jovial root]

woops thats what i meant

not parallel

the angles should be the same tho

@jovial garnet sorry bout that, important correction to make

the lines are the same length not parallel

oh wait hold on ive been rather stupid

[jovial garnet]

Mb for late answer

Is it still 35?

[jovial root]

i do not believe so, my apologies

ive been tryna work it over

but ive only gotten this far

[jovial garnet]

Thanks, I appreciate it🙏

[jovial root]

im gonna keep with it till i find the answer

ill ping you if i find it, but see if that helps you

[grim pewter]

@jovial garnet has given 1 rep to @jovial root

[jovial garnet]

Alright bet

[crystal ivy]

looks cyclic (lol)

[acoustic radish]

where did you get Q = x + 40? isn't Q = x + 20 by right triangles with perpendicular bisector of the vertical diagonal?
nvm my bad you are correct

[acoustic radish]

i dont think so, the angle below x should be 80 then

its not exactly to scale, the supposedly equal lengths dont look exactly equal

but its pretty close

[jovial root]

Yeah the shape isn't to scale

Or at least that's the intention of the question

I just end up proving x+z = 70

[acoustic radish]

i have a diagram thats to scale

[jovial root]

I have no idea how you get z or x

[acoustic radish]

i think this can be done with a significant effort using trigonometry

then it will be an equation and we'll have to make a guess

and it will be a simple angle

[jovial root]

It's definitely not meant to be that complicated

[acoustic radish]

and then the other way to do it will be extremely slick, just drawing a few points

that you would absolutely not think of

at least, that's the way it was on a similar famous angle finding problem

[jovial root]

This is similar to year 10 maths which is why I'm bewildered by the fact it's taking me so long to figure it out

[acoustic radish]

there is in general no closed solution to such things

theres not a formula you can apply

[jovial root]

Can you not setup simultaneous equations of some sort between the two triangles?

Though everhtime I try it I just prove x+z=70

[acoustic radish]

we have to depend on the problem having some lucky angles that make things work out nicely

[jovial root]

Because you get
2x+2z+40 =180
x+z+110=180
(x+40)+z+70=180

As far as I can take it

I'm wondering if there's maybe some law about triangles opposite to one another or similar that can be applied

Oh wait angles in a rhombus =360

Nvm that doesn't help you just prove x+z=70 again

[calm badge]

what is coordbash

[acoustic radish]

thats where you give every point a location on the x/y plane

usually

[jovial root]

upon further reflection this is missing some information

otherwise it is unsolvable

Hold on a sec

Yeah I'm 85% sure it's unsolvable

[acoustic radish]

it's solvable

the answer is 20

[jovial root]

how'd you get to it

[acoustic radish]

you just cant get that with pure angle chasing

[acoustic radish]

calculator

[jovial root]

then its not the right answer

[acoustic radish]

there is of course a better way

[jovial root]

as i could draw you another rhombus with the same values that are given

which calculator did you use?

[acoustic radish]

desmos, after i did the trig method i talked about, and geogebra also agrees

[jovial garnet]

How did you get 20?

[acoustic radish]

.

[jovial garnet]

How can I do it without a calculator

[acoustic radish]

i don't know

[jovial garnet]

Alright

[calm badge]

can't x also be 0?

but according to the diagram x can't be 0?

[peak cedar]

I don't think there's enough data for this to be solvable.

[acoustic radish]

wat

i mean maybe x can be like greater than 90 or who knows

but you follow the diagram

this is the only value of x that looks anything like the diagram

[calm badge]

x can't be over 90

but I get your point