This Defies Everything!!!!!!!!!

Joined
May 24, 2003
Messages
806
Reaction score
0
trigrid.gif


i know its off topic but i cant figure it out and maybe some1 here can
i meassured the parts and they are all exactly the same
 
Yep. sometimes the simple answer is the correct. They are arrange differently :p
 
On the second pic look where the hypotenuse intersects with the graph. Compare it with the top one. This is most evident on the tenth line from the left. On the top pick it intersects right on the mark, on the lower one it is intersecting at a higher point.
 
Easy, the height is off by 1 sqaure. OooooOooooooo.


Edit: NO IT'S NOT! MY BRAINNNN!!!! Wrong forum.
 
The red triangle is three squares high, the teal triangle is two squares high. When switched, it forces the other orange and green squares to a smaller space, thus making a 'gap' since they were not intended to fit in a different pattern... Simple geometry.
 
yes, they are arranged differently, but why is the area decreased by one square on the bottom one?
 
Originally posted by Folder
The red triangle is three squares high, the teal triangle is two squares high. When switched, it forces the other orange and green squares to a smaller space, thus making a 'gap' since they were not intended to fit in a different pattern... Simple geometry.

Ok thats obvious. But that means the bottom triangle is one square less in area. That's impossible, since the bigger triangles are the same size.
 
the long sides arent straight in either picture.

they're angles, the first image the top side is slightly concave, in the second image the top is convex, when you overlay them you can see a gap ontop that is the same area as the missing block in the second image :)
 
On each of the shapes count the amount of squares taken up by the yellow and green squares. The top one has 15, yet the bottom one has 16 (one being a blank square).

When the top yellow and green shapes are together they are more condensed because they are arranged more snugly, whereas on the bottom it's not a tight correlation therefore you're left with one blank spot.

Makes sense if u think about it.
 
I have counted exactly the same amount of filled area's for each colour shape. Very strange :D
 
i.e. You are assuming that both triangles have the same angle. They don't. The extra area comes from that obtuse angle created by the first arrangement. The larger triangle has a 20.5560 degree angle. The smaller has a 21.8014 degree angle.
 
What the hell? This shouldn't be. The area SHOULD be the same. the same shape has been maintained, and there has been no transformation. There is no logical answer for this.
 
Just a big note for everyone: The slopes of the two triangles are NOT the same.
 
No, I copied it into photoshop and they are not the same. If they didn't have the thick outlines it would be obvious.

Problem solved :)
 
gMANiac, even if the angles were the same, the exact same question still goes. Graph it perfectly, because this one isn't EXACTLY the same. You will see that the problem is still there. It is baffling, I tell you.
 
Dunno if this matters. Did what the other guy said. They're overlapped.
 
Could it be that you mistakenly assumed that you are looking at a triangle when in fact you are looking at individual pieces that are combined to resemble a triangle. Therefore you mistakenly assume that the total area involved is the area of a triangle.

The surface areas of all pieces combined in both pics is the same but they are rearranged slightly differently, so that they do not form a true triangle. the first pic gives the illusion of a triangle in order to fool you. My theory anyhways :cheese: .
 
It like lego's for example...


You can make a shape with a limited number of blocks, each one a different style and still be able to make that same shape by rearranging them in a different style...

Your mind makes up for the missing block by mentally adding it... The shape in the picture is not exactly the same because it is missing a block, and the area/mass is not the same since you have to subtract the missing cube.. However your mind makes you think the shape is exactly the same because you adready have the previous image in your head.

Its a mind game.
 
Xtasy0's right.

The hypotenuse's on both triangles are very slightly bent.

Top = Concave
Bottom = Convex

Look at it. End of story.
 
Valved Ray, you might have just stumbled upon a permanent unsolvable problem. I gotta show this to my Calculus teacher!
 
look where the green and red tris meet in the top pic

they meet at a grid point

look in that same area in the second pic. the line isnt on a grid point,

so the shapes arent the same
 
It doesn't matter if they are bent, damnit! Just graph it on graph paper, and you will see that they cannot both be true!
 
Fuch it, let me get my graphing calculator. TI-92
 
the hypotenuse is not a straight line, use a straight edge and you will see for yourself. in the top "triangle" (actually a quadrilateral) the hypotenuse bows down. in the bottom "triangle" the hypotenuse bows up leaving room for an extra square. the red and green triangles should be similar triangles. but, the ratio of the sides is 2:5 and the other it is 3:8 these are not similar so do not make a straight line.


i needed my dad for that one:cool:
 
if u do the calculation using the unit blocks u can see that the angles are not the same between the red and dark green triangle
dark green is tan-1(2/5) and the red one is tan-1(3/8) angle different, not similar triangles
 
It's nothing to do with angles
 
Back
Top