|
where did the hole come from ?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| gurukool |
eat this !!
All the coloured pieces are exactly the same in both the figures.
Where did the hole come from?:eyes: |
|
|
| DJ RozzeR |
| its either a dumb twat , or thats impossible ? |
|
|
| Aled_ |
| Ain't the size of the triangle detemined by the outer lines not the 'content' or volume of what's inside it?? So if you move around on the inside, it still stays the same size? Oh it! Lol! I have no idea what Im on about!? It must be magic! :stongue: :D |
|
|
| DJ El Kay Dee |
| if u look along the hypotenuese of the 2 of em against the grid, u will notice that strangely the lowere one seems to be using up more volume....however...the other sides of the triangle are exact...which means that this is a manipulation |
|
|
| Acid Junkie |
| what u see in that picture is not triangles. the first figure is a bounded non-convex quadrangle, and the sloping "line" is not the hypotenuse. in fact, the hypotenuse doesn't exist at all; u can easily prove (by using any trigonometric function) that there's a "hidden" angle in the middle of the pseudo-hypotenuse. that fourth angle is very close to a flat one and therefore looks like a line. now, in the second picture u have different angles again, which gives u a different area. |
|
|
| Spad |
| quote: | Originally posted by Acid Junkie
what u see in that picture is not triangles. the first figure is a bounded non-convex quadrangle, and the sloping "line" is not the hypotenuse. in fact, the hypotenuse doesn't exist at all; u can easily prove (by using any trigonometric function) that there's a "hidden" angle in the middle of the pseudo-hypotenuse. that fourth angle is very close to a flat one and therefore looks like a line. now, in the second picture u have different angles again, which gives u a different area. |
I was just about to make that point myself. |
|
|
| DJ El Kay Dee |
| quote: | Originally posted by Spad
I was just about to make that point myself. |
yea..same here:tongue2 |
|
|
| DJ_NRG |
| quote: | Originally posted by Acid Junkie
what u see in that picture is not triangles. the first figure is a bounded non-convex quadrangle, and the sloping "line" is not the hypotenuse. in fact, the hypotenuse doesn't exist at all; u can easily prove (by using any trigonometric function) that there's a "hidden" angle in the middle of the pseudo-hypotenuse. that fourth angle is very close to a flat one and therefore looks like a line. now, in the second picture u have different angles again, which gives u a different area. |
Is it just me, or could Acid Junkie be just about the smartest man on the planet? LOL |
|
|
| N|te-L|fe |
| Seen it before, I hardly remember but I think the upper curve is slightly higher in the second, therefore leaving a gap at the bottom with the space left |
|
|
| whiskers |
there was like a 20-page thread about this and someone figured out that the squares in the background are there to make the hypotenuses look straight, while they're actually curved. the angle sum doesn't equal to 180 degrees in either of these triangles
that's what Acid Junkie was talking about |
|
|
| J-LoOks |
| You guys have to much time on your hands :) |
|
|
|
|
