border said:Oh wait, now I remember.
You have to split it into two right triangles, a base of (15.5/2).
Use pythagorean theorem for the height....then it is (b*h)/2 for the area of each triangle. And those two areas together for the area of the isoceles triangle, then subtract the area of the rectangle.
Convert everything into inches first. They are obviously trying to fuck with you by giving you one measurement as 15.5 feet, but the others are in ft + inches.
Yikes. I think your units might be off.Loki said:Dividing this by 12 (inches) yields 634.11 feet.
Hitokage said:This thread is beyond sad.
Cyan said:Loki: You divided by 12 to get feet, but it's SQUARE feet, so you should have divided by 144. Other than that I think you were right.
Hitman said:You guys suck ass at math!
Hitokage said:This thread is beyond sad.
GG-Duo said:No, I think a right triangle has to have all 3 sides to be the same and perpendicular to each other in order for the Pythagorean Lemma to work.
Tenacious-V said:it's an isosceles triangle, where 2 sides are equal. A right angle triangle is where 1 side is 90*.
not true. only thing you can assume is that the two angles will be equal, they could have infinite number of values. they could both be 20 degrees and the bigger angle would be 140 degrees.gamepro said:(LEG1*LEG2)/2 = area of a right triangle (this is a right triangle since we know that 2 angles are 45 degrees due to the opposite sides being equal.
nitewulf said:since two sides are equal, it's an isosceles triangle. and when you drop a perpendicular from the vertex of said triangle, it bisects the base. you know the length of the base.
so drop a perpendicular from the vertex, now you know what the base of the newly formed right triangle is. you also know the length of it's hypotenuse (11ft). so now you can find the height of this triangle using the pythagorean formula/identity. once you know the height, you can derive the area by using the formula for the area of a triangle (.5*base*height). multiply this area by two to get the area of the original triangle, and finally subtract the area of the rectangle (L*W) from it.
only thing trivial is to convert everything into either inches or feet and knowing the eucledean law of a perpendicular bisector (which sorta becomes intuitive from practice and common sense perhaps).
well, even in square inches form the answer would be correct, there is no particular reasons to convert it into square feet or vice versa, unless specified otherwise.Loki said:That's exactly what I did, yet I still have this sneaking suspicion that people are calling me "sad" and other such hurtful things because I forgot to ultimately divide the answer by 144 (12^2, to get the answer in feet), and instead divided by 12 (forgetting that you have to square it). Never mind that I was typing very quickly and watching the game at the same time. I'm quite torn up over it.
nitewulf said:well, even in square inches form the answer would be correct, there is no particular reasons to convert it into square feet or vice versa, unless specified otherwise.
Well not if you denoted them as feetLoki said:This is true also. It would appear that my dejection is unwarranted in this instance.
SUCK IT DOWN, MOCKING BITCHES!
Loki: redeemed
Jak140 said:Well not if you denoted them as feet
Archaix said:...
...
...
Please...please draw a triangle that is composed of three right angles for me. Please.
Archaix said:...
...
...
Please...please draw a triangle that is composed of three right angles for me. Please.
Yeah. Sad just about starts to describe it.
GG-Duo said:Ok, between this and that Bush deficit thread... is today "ignore GG-Duo's sarcasm" day?