not sure if this has already been posted,
but it had me going for a bit :B
Printable View
not sure if this has already been posted,
but it had me going for a bit :B
Good one.
The answer is certainly subtle. :D
All a matter of perspective you just need to look at it from a diffrent angle :roll:
I'm "inclined" to think this is a beauty.
can anyone explain this to me?
we can't figure it out at work.
in the top pix the hypotenuse is not a straight line
Nor is the one in the bottom pix. :D
ahhh, i get it!
so if you overlay the two images, the area bounded by the 2 kinked hypotenuseseses is equal to the area of the missing block ?
What kinks? :?
when taking the hypotenuse of the overall triangle (a combination of the red and dark green hypotenuseseses :B ) there is an effective kink at the change of colour from red to dark green, as the two triangles (red and dark green) have different yet similar angles at the acute point to the left when viewing the picture.
or were you pulling my leg cliff?
i know what i'm trying to say but the vitamins are preventing coherent writing...
Cliff pull your leg ...never . ....straight as the day is long .......though it is night time now :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by jaguarrh
Cliff is pulling your leg into alignment.:D
Joe
What hump?
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZybFl_pfMk"]YouTube - Funniest movie line ever[/ame]
Yes.:2tsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by jaguarrh
Kink? :no: There aren't no kink in that hypotenuse. It's straight. There's a different answer.
you're on drugs:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Afro Boy
Cheers
Michael
Yeah, I must be. Took a closer and yes, the angle of each of the smaller triangles is slightly different. :2tsup:
Here's a woodies version: http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~gunders...e_triangle.htm