Forum menu
Maths problem...
 

[Closed] Maths problem...

Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 
[#5880632]

In a typical midweek way I was distracted from work by Facebook and someone posting a maths problem involving triangles. I can't figure it out so I wondered if the hive mind could. From the picture below try and find the angle x.

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 4:57 pm
Posts: 20985
 

10 deg?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:07 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

x = 30

angles of a triangle all add up to 180.

I did it with a bit of trial and error but sure there will be a better way

If x = 30 then angles at E are, 30, 30 and 120.

this then makes angles at D 40, 100 & 40


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:10 pm
 JoeG
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

The angles don't make sense. At the X in the lower part, the 50 is a larger angle than the 130...


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:10 pm
Posts: 23335
Free Member
 

[img] [/img]


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:12 pm
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

why are the 50's in the middle larger than the 130's?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:12 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

The angles don't make sense. At the X in the lower part, the 50 is a larger angle than the 130...

its not drawn correctly,


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:12 pm
Posts: 20985
 

i assumed the 50/130 were written in the wrong angles...


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:13 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Topic starter
 

It's not to scale, just a hand drawn copy which is why the physical look of the angles is weird.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:13 pm
Posts: 11937
Free Member
 

It'll not be drawn to scale, to stop you measuring the angles.

There are various facts you can work out, using the sum of the angles in a triangle being 180deg and the sum in a quadrilateral being 360deg. Some rearranging and substituting should get you [i]x[/i].


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:15 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

i assumed the 50/130 were written in the wrong angles...

making the angles of the right triangle add up to 100?

Never assume as it makes and ass of u and me


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:16 pm
Posts: 901
Free Member
 

Nope 20 deg


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:16 pm
Posts: 1286
Free Member
 

JoeG - Member

The angles don't make sense. At the X in the lower part, the 50 is a larger angle than the 130...

Angles are correct, originator can't draw worth a damn though...

Edit: and I'm sllloooowww ๐Ÿ˜€


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:18 pm
Posts: 10538
Full Member
 

20 degrees

I drew it out in CAD!!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:19 pm
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

How can we trust a question set by someone who can't even draw 10 triangles to scale?

*tuts*


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:19 pm
Posts: 3729
Free Member
 

Hmmm I can't find a way to quickly calculate x so I'm going to guess that you have to calculate all four unknown angles which will mean a system of 4 equations with 4 unknowns simultaneously.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:20 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

20 by trial and error, but isn't this one of thse questions where you create two forumulae for x and the other unknowns and then use simultaneous equations/subtsituting the values of the two unknowns?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:23 pm
Posts: 9
Free Member
 

Thats what im doing at the moment, but I havent done this stuff for 20+ years.
Good to know I still can though.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:23 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Anyone solved it without brute-force/IT witchcraft? Just genuinely interested in an elegant solution. I probably still won't get it but hey.

And LOL at the protractor-wielding literalists


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:26 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

cmon bigyinn - one of us has to get the formula. I am even trying extending the lines outside the triangle.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:29 pm
 timc
Posts: 2509
Free Member
 

60?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:29 pm
Posts: 10538
Full Member
 

[img][url= http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7428/12088092873_fa7175d99a_o.jp g" target="_blank">http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7428/12088092873_fa7175d99a_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
[url= http://www.flickr.com/photos/55623703@N05/12088092873/ ]angle[/url] by [url= http://www.flickr.com/people/55623703@N05/ ]Adam Branston[/url], on Flickr[/img]

Well that's what it's supposed to look like anyway!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:29 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

ads beat me to it.. CAD for the win! ๐Ÿ˜‰

I thought it might have something to do with simultaneous equations, but I can't remember how to do them anymore!

Look forward to the answer and workings... for when this does the rounds on FacePoo. ๐Ÿ˜†


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:31 pm
Posts: 251
Full Member
 

you have to use the 'bigger' triangles as well as the small ones - there's about 10ish triangles in there and you can use the larger ones to help calculate the angles on the smaller ones.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:32 pm
Posts: 25943
Full Member
 

I make it 80 - I'm no mathematician though


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:35 pm
Posts: 10538
Full Member
 

I can't do maths without computer aids any more. Actually i never really could, just did enough to pass the right exams!!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:37 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Computer aids? that sounds nasty! ๐Ÿ˜ฏ


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:38 pm
Posts: 41395
Free Member
 

So no one's solved it formulaicly? (sp)

If y is the upper angle at D, x = y-10. I guess you play with that a bit more?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:38 pm
Posts: 25943
Full Member
 

I just substituted some unknown angle values using the (x+this+that)=180 in a couple of places - gave a formula but , meh


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:44 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

This is annoying me now. 20 seemed to work, but here is a formula attemp

CDB = 140
EDB = 130-x
CDE = 140-x

therefore, 130-x+140-x = 140

270-2x =140
-2x =140-270
-2x = -130
x= 65

but that looks wrong


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:47 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I did it using known angles and substitutions and got x = 70, assuming the diagram is not to scale...

Are there lots of right answers?


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 5:50 pm
Posts: 495
Full Member
 

x = 20 degrees?

EDIT: Put in other symbols for the other unkown angles (y, z, etc.), then as sum of all angles in each triangle = 180, re-arrange equations to the form of e.g. y = x + 50 + 30 and then put that into the sum for a triangle that you've used 'y' in and solve to find x? I imagine there's a clearer way of expressing that!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 6:05 pm
Posts: 10341
Free Member
 

Come one I've refreshed enough times now. Someone put me out of my misery.
Edit - and before someone says - I know it's ****** 20!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 6:16 pm
Posts: 495
Full Member
 

Or, you can use the existing angles to give a set length to a particular side, and then calculate the relative lengths of the other sides, forming more triangle using 90 degrees where necessary, in order to calculate the angle that way. But that'd just be complicated ๐Ÿ˜€


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 6:27 pm
 Drac
Posts: 50619
 

Any triangle out of all the options that take in X works if X is out 20 and the angle at D above 40 (With me) has to be 110 to work in all options that use that angle.

The answer is indeed 20.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 6:44 pm
Posts: 17335
Full Member
 

It's non-soluble without a length as the angle changes dependent on the height of the major triangle.

Assume the top triangle is
20
a b

and the complementary angles are c and x, so
20
a b
c x

we need to find a,b,c and x. Four equations and four unknowns;
a+b=160
a+x=150
b+c=140
x+c=130

Now you can solve these either as a matrix and take the inverse of the 4x4 or you can back substitute;

[160] [1100] [a]
[150] = [1001] [b]
[140] [0110] [c]
[130] [0011] [x]

Unfortunately the determinant of this matrix is zero, so there is no inverse. Hence no solution to the four equations. The problem is ill posed.

For back substitution;
c=130-x
b=140-c = 140-(130-x) = 10+x
a+b = a+(10+x) = 160 so a+x = 150

Hence you really only have three equations and four unknowns. That's why it is on Facebook ๐Ÿ˜‰

Maths is more fun than bike fitting ๐Ÿ˜‰


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:19 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Cheers tired, that was becoming somewhat annoying!!!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:23 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Yep, Thanks Tired! I wasted about 15 min on that!


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:29 pm
Posts: 25943
Full Member
 

It can't be insoluble, can it ? After all, somebody managed to draw it.

Must be calculable using sin/cos etc I'd guess

(then again, I said 80 degrees)


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:33 pm
Posts: 17335
Full Member
 

You are welcome to try, but you will need a scale (length) before you bring out the Cos or Sin rules big guns ๐Ÿ˜ˆ


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:37 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

60 degrees


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:42 pm
Posts: 10341
Free Member
 

It's non-soluble without a length as the angle changes dependent on the height of the major triangle.

That's the bit I don't get. We know the shape can't change (it can't be a taller and thinner for example), so the whole thing can only scale in unison.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:44 pm
Posts: 17335
Full Member
 

You are right, but it is ill-posed. Unless anyone spots an error in my alebra. Didn't see one. four unknowns but only three independent equations. That means you can find x in terms of a ratio of another angle you can't find. So you'll have to draw it.

Ask yourself why it might be on Facebook ๐Ÿ˜‰


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 7:48 pm
Posts: 7513
Free Member
 

Tired, if you think it is ill-posed, you find two solutions and draw them accurately ๐Ÿ™‚

Never was much good at geometry, but I'll have a think about it. I think it must have a neat solution.


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 8:08 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

At airport waiting for a flight so this is perfect :))

@Tired's got it with the comment that the solution can be an equation, it doesn't have to be a single number ("42" and all that ๐Ÿ™‚ )

Will double check once on plane where I can write out the various equations. @Tired you kissed the chance to accuse everyone else of going off at a tangent ... I'll get my coat


 
Posted : 22/01/2014 8:18 pm
Page 1 / 2