this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
1106 points (98.2% liked)

People Twitter

5258 readers
724 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a tweet or similar
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Habahnow@sh.itjust.works 62 points 1 month ago (39 children)

All these people saying its 135 are making big assumptions that I think is incorrect. There’s one triangle (the left one) that has the angles 40, 60, 80. The 80 degrees is calculated based on the other angles. What's very important is the fact that these triangles appear to have a shared 90 degree corner, but that is not the case based on what we just calculated. This means the image is not to scale and we must not make any visual assumptions. So that means we can’t figure out the angles of the right triangle since we only have information of 1 angle (the other can’t be figured out since we can’t assume its actually aligned at the bottom since the graph is now obviously not to scale).

Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (7 children)

Stupid stuff like this is why kids hate math class. Unless the problem says calculate all unmarked angles, those visually 90 degree angles are 90 degrees. It works that way in any non engineering job that uses angles because it's common sense.

[–] TheOakTree@lemm.ee 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (6 children)

...what? I get that this drawing is very dysfunctional, but are you going to argue that a triangle within a plane can have a sum of angles of 190°?

[–] NoMoreLurkingToo@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The sum of the angles of a triangle are always 180°

[–] TheOakTree@lemm.ee 4 points 1 month ago

Yes, I believe I implied this by suggesting that the sum of angles being 190° is absurd.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (35 replies)