|
|
#41 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 8,023
|
Correct solution, but needlessly complicated. There is a solution that requires no trig -- just pure geometric reasoning, and this is the solution I'm asking about. Regardless, nice job! Very cool
|
|
|
|
|
|
#42 |
|
FFR Player
|
oh in that case i'll post mine just a sec
__________________
Last edited by Tokzic: Today at 11:59 PM. Reason: wait what |
|
|
|
|
|
#43 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 429
|
i've got almost all the angles, need 4 more, lol, I haven't done geometry in WAY too long... 2 months...
Edit: yeah I"m pretty ****ing stumped, haven't looked at mr richard's "solution" yet, though.
__________________
![]() Quote:
Last edited by Xezial; 09-9-2007 at 04:38 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#44 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 240
|
hmm it has to do with congruent sides i think...
UY~YV UV~UW |
|
|
|
|
|
#45 |
|
V's beta-male entourage
|
The degree is 15
|
|
|
|
|
|
#46 |
|
FFR Veteran
|
lolz
|
|
|
|
|
|
#47 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#48 |
|
Banned
|
Do I need to solve it with Paint or can I solve it on graph paper on my desk then take a picture of it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#49 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 91
|
Perhaps these similar triangles are what you're after - simpler and provable without a calculator, though I still used a fair bit of working to prove the side ratios (omitted, tell me if you really want to see it).
There is also a very nice method of dividing the triangle into 3 similar regular trapezoids, but it also gets ugly at the end. I suspect there might be a further little trick involved to reduce the working - the kind that gets mathematicians all wet around the cosines... Frankly, I still quite like my first sledgehammer approach. ![]() perkeyone: I use Microsoft Visio for the drawings |
|
|
|
|
|
#50 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 240
|
hey there are 1001 ways to solve this thing so why dont u let us know what way u did it, i am curious to know
|
|
|
|
|
|
#51 |
|
Falcon Paaaauuuunch!!!!!!
|
Here's what I came up with:
![]()
__________________
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#52 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 2005
Age: 30
Posts: 240
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 91
|
Here's my full working. Involves some trig, but with no evaluation - so it's utterly rigorous. There may be a cheeky way to show it more simply, but this'll do.
![]() Last edited by MRichards; 09-10-2007 at 10:42 AM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 | |
|
Supreme Dictator For Life
|
o.o;; it's been more than 4 years since I've taken math, more than 6 since I've used geometry... but mrichard's and doug's look right.
...i was considered smart once.
__________________
Back to "Back to Earth" Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#55 | |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: New York City, New York
Posts: 8,023
|
Quote:
VERY nice ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
FFR Player
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 91
|
What is the method that requires no trig?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
FFR Veteran
|
MRichards seems to be FFR's numbers man. I remember his awsome speed mod FFR to Stepmania comparison. I guess Mrubix is numbertacluar as well.
My high school education understands this sort of but I cant do it on my own or from scratch.
__________________
Orbb fan club. White text society. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|