this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2024
1120 points (98.3% liked)

People Twitter

6713 readers
2056 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

  1. Mark NSFW content.
  2. No doxxing people.
  3. Must be a pic of the tweet or similar. No direct links to the tweet.
  4. No bullying or international politcs
  5. Be excellent to each other.
  6. Provide an archived link to the tweet (or similar) being shown if it's a major figure or a politician.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
(page 3) 48 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago

Someone used “x” to mean the variable x on a podcast the other day and it made me wonder if Gen Z is happy to call eX-Twitter “X” and if they calls Tweets “posts”.

Annoying change for eX-Twitter

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

~~125 = 180 - (180 - 90 - 35)~~

Edit: Never mind I saw the explanation for the correct answer below

[–] [email protected] 64 points 5 months ago (7 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.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months 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.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] [email protected] 56 points 5 months ago (5 children)

135 is correct. Bottom intersection is 80/100, 180-35-100 = 45 for the top of the second triangle. 180 - 45 = 135

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (13 children)

You're making the assumption that the straight line consisting of the bottom edge of both triangles is made of supplementary angles. This is not defined due to the nature of the image not being to scale.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I mean, the assumption shouldn't be anything about scale. It should be that we're looking at straight lines. And if we can't assume that, then what are we even doing.

But, assuming straight lines, given straight lines you find the other side of an intersecting line because of complements.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

We can't assume that the straight line across the bottom is a straight line because the angles in the drawing are not to scale. Who's to say that the "right angle" of the right side triangle isn't 144°?

If the scale is not consistent with euclidian planar geometry, one could argue that the scale is consistent within itself, thus the right triangle's "right angle" might also be 80°, which is not a supplement to the known 80° angle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

And if we can't assume that, then what are we even doing

That's exactly what the other user is saying. We can't assume straight lines because the given angles don't make any sense and thus this graph is literally impossible to make. We're arguing over literal click bait is what we're doing.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (3 children)

Why do the labeled angles prevent us from assuming straight lines?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago (4 children)

the answers here assume that the base is a continuous, straight line

given one of the angles on the left triangle is a right angle on the diagram, but 80 if you calculate it, you can't assume that

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

40 + 60 + 35 Godamn It's kids math.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 13 points 5 months ago (1 children)

C'man there's totally a 1px shift on the line. You can't just assume it's a right angle.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Doing 5th grade math makes me feel like a fucking genius. Cant believe I figured it out tbh

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Seeing the other comments, it might be worth a shot to repost this meme with your math homework thrown in for easy solutions.

Of course, I did the math too before looking.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 216 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (7 children)

What a deviously misleading diagram.

The triangle on the left isn't actually a right angle triangle, as the other angles add to 100°, meaning the final one is actually 80°, not 90°.

Therefore the triangle on the right also isn't a right angle triangle. That corner is 100°.

100+35=135°. 180-135=45°. So that's 45° for the top angle.

X = the straight line of the joined triangles (180°) - the top angle of the right triangle (45°). 180-45=135°

X is 135°, not the 125° it initially appears to be.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 months ago (3 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago (3 children)

I... don't understand it ?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (3 children)

It literally explains it in the comic? People who communicate badly and then act smug when they're misunderstood are annoying. The other user is saying that the same applies to the OPs post; because the angles don't match the graphic, they're communicating badly

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 26 points 5 months ago

I used to have teacher who deliberately made disproportionate diagrams. His reasoning was that people trust too much what their eyes see and not enough what the numbers tell them. He would've loved that diagram.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Leave it to the Grand Nagus to spot a clever ruse.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

12th rule of acquisition : let assumptions work in your favor

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

I thought is was wierd that my math didn't make sense, thanks!

[–] [email protected] 69 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It also doesn't say that the line on the bottom is straight, so we have no idea if that middle vertex adds up to 180 degrees. I would say it is unsolvable.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is what I was thinking. The image is not to scale, so it is risky to say that the angles at the bottom center add up to 180, despite looking that way. If a presented angle does not represent the real angle, then presented straight lines might not represent real lines.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Eh, I think @sag pretty well nailed it.

Looks like an outer triangle with inner triangles so x = 180 - (180 - (40 + 60 + 35)) = 40 + 60 + 35 = 135

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Can you clarify what you mean? this doesn't make sense to me. There isn't an "outer" triangle. There's one triangle (the left one) that has the angles 40, 60, 80. Both triangles are misleadingly drawn as they appear to be aligned at the bottom but they're not (left triangle's non-displayed angle is 80, not 90 degrees). 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).

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 5 months ago

I looked at that "90°" angle and went "that doesn't look right..."

[–] [email protected] 45 points 5 months ago (4 children)

trash diagram too, the 90 degree looking center angle is actually 80 on the left, 100 on the right.

180 - (100 + 35) = y

x = 180 -y

I can't be assed to do the simple math

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago (1 children)

trash diagram too

A lot of those standardized tests like SAT or GRE like to put those in (or at least they used to) on purpose. It wasn't that they couldn't render the diagrams correctly, instead they were checking for people making assumptions with information that wasn't given. To be somewhat fair I seem to recall a disclaimer that they weren't necessarily drawn accurately.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 32 points 5 months ago (1 children)

135°.

The non-right-angle is downright cheeky.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

Oh my god , those jerks. Lol

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (8 children)

125°

Edit: Damn I'm getting roasted for getting it wrong. I totally am wrong, but when I've been awake for only 5 minutes that's bound to happen XD

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago

Good on you for admitting fault, not deleting the post, and standing strong. I know you probably feel like a total braindead fucking moron right now - and you'd be right to - which may be the only thing you've gotten right in your whole life. /s

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Not to scale. Left triangle shows that the centre tee is actually 80/100⁰, not two right angles. So right triangle is 100+35+45, angle x is 135⁰.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

It's a trap. The drawing is misleading. If the left triangle already has 60° and 40° then only 80° remains. Meaning there's no right angle. The vertical line should be leaning to the left slightly. The correct answer is 135°.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wrong, as the drawing is not representative. The inner lower angle for the right triangle has to be 100°, as such the inner upper angle has to be 45° and the X angle has to be 135°.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Federation in action: 5 different people from 4 different instances correct OP, not knowing the others have done so, because federating the answers takes a minute.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago

5/10 show your work next time! /s

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago (1 children)

He actually doesn't lol. It's 135°.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 months ago

Nah he definitely does angle. Maybe not super well or anything but there’s clearly some angling happening

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›