Possibly you would have got a house with a floor area of 350 but an invoice for an area of 500.
Of course if you were mathematically challenged, you would be quite happy with the house and the bill. Ignorance is bliss.:D
Printable View
Possibly you would have got a house with a floor area of 350 but an invoice for an area of 500.
Of course if you were mathematically challenged, you would be quite happy with the house and the bill. Ignorance is bliss.:D
I would be happy if it was the other way round but of course the rooms might be the wrong shapesQuote:
Originally Posted by Wood Borer
you get a new maths question tomorrow:D
You'll compromise the drivel channel. What'll we do?:DQuote:
Originally Posted by SPIRIT
good point you cliff and the others should be able to help with my kids homework:D :U
I am not available tomorrow. I have more important thing to discuss in another forum. :D
:kiss1:Quote:
Originally Posted by SPIRIT
are you trying to say we are math debating:U:U:UQuote:
Originally Posted by SPIRIT
width of rectangle = (90 – 2 x 25) /4 = 10 cmQuote:
Originally Posted by SPIRIT
Rectangle is thus 35cm long and 10 cm wide
check the sums — (length + width) x 2 = (35 + 10) x 2 = 90 checks
area = 35 x 10 = 350 cm squared
ian
Ian, where were you when we needed you.:p
Those from Copernious's time couldn't, but it's straight forward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wood Borer
A sphere casts a cylindrical shadow no matter what direction it is illuminated from. This is the only shape that does.
During a lunar eclipse the earth's shadow as it passes across the moon is always round. Therefore the earth is a sphere.
AND if you can measure distances along a meridian you can work out the earth's approximate size.
ian
at work!Quote:
Originally Posted by Wongo
where I dare not visit here
ian
In the early days scientists went to still lakes and measured how much "dip" there was from one end of the lake to the other by measuring how far out of sight a graduated object fell. Assuming light travelled in a straight line they were able to calculate the radius of the earth.
This method of course had several problems:
1: It is possible that the atmosphere near the lake had different densities, temperatures etc that could cause refraction (bending of light).
2: It didn't prove the radius of earth was reasonably constant so unless multiple measurements were made in different directions in many places, this method only suggested that the earth's surface was curved.
People who state that they have seen "pictures" of the earth from space could be victims of a photography hoax. For example some Science Fiction pictures seem more realistic than current and past photos from space.
Personally I believe the earth is almost spherical, assuming that it is certainly helped me navigate using a sextant and compass. Unless of course I stuffed up the calculations and by pure chance happened to return.:D
Could I prove it was spherical? Not conclusively. Like many others on this forum I have studied University Maths however I wouldn't bet my LNs that I could prove the earth was round.
By prove I mean a mathematical proof and not an argument that convinces others that I am right.
That assumes that the moon is lit by the sun and not from some other source, such as radioactive cheese.Quote:
A sphere casts a cylindrical shadow no matter what direction it is illuminated from. This is the only shape that does.
During a lunar eclipse the earth's shadow as it passes across the moon is always round. Therefore the earth is a sphere.
It it really is round, wouldn't it make sense to fire the rockets sideways over the Atlantic so the go downhill rather than straight up at the moon. Burn a lot less fuel, surely. Mr C, I never thought of the hot cheese possibility. Is that widely known?
Quote:
Originally Posted by silentC
But wouldn't radioactive cheese cause radio communications problems when we have a full moon? Probably would be called Moon spots.