Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > 2+2 Communities > Other Other Topics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:34 PM
J_V J_V is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,185
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

Yes, I meant not simple.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:34 PM
captswifty captswifty is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Appleton, Wisconsin
Posts: 72
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is 3*(7+6+5+4+3+2+1)=84.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect. You're counting triangles from one side to the other, but what about just counting the ones in the middle? There are a lot more than 84 there.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:34 PM
jason_t jason_t is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Another downswing?
Posts: 2,274
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is 3*(7+6+5+4+3+2+1)=84.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more. A lot more. C'mon jason_t. Are you stoned?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. No. No. No.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:35 PM
GuyOnTilt GuyOnTilt is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,405
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

My first guess is 84, which is just the summation of x for 1-7 times 3. Times three beecause of the three sections of triangles.

PS. This place really needs to support LaTeX (for the 8th time).

GoT
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:36 PM
jason_t jason_t is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Another downswing?
Posts: 2,274
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is 3*(7+6+5+4+3+2+1)=84.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Incorrect. You're counting triangles from one side to the other, but what about just counting the ones in the middle? There are a lot more than 84 there.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but if you understood how the solution

(7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1) * 3

is counting the triangles you would see that it's counting the "ones in the middle."
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:37 PM
ihardlyknowher ihardlyknowher is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: All-in on a draw.
Posts: 213
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think it is 3*(7+6+5+4+3+2+1)=84.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's more. A lot more. C'mon jason_t. Are you stoned?

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you sure? Remember a trapezoid is not a triangle.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I'm sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's is my reasoning. In the top tier there are 7 small triangles (triangle that cross zero lines). 6 triangles that cross 1 line. 5 that cross 2 lines. .... and 1 that crosses 6 lines.

Each tier adds a new set of such triangles. Thus, the times 3 part.

Please enlighten us as to yours?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:40 PM
Patrick del Poker Grande Patrick del Poker Grande is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 8
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]
With the amount of triangles that overlap, I can't think of a way to solve this without taking a couple hours and counting them all.

[/ QUOTE ]
How long does it take for you to count to 84? Or how about to 28?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:40 PM
DrPublo DrPublo is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Princeton, NJ
Posts: 38
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

[ QUOTE ]

PS. This place really needs to support LaTeX

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be very awesome.

The Doc
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:41 PM
captswifty captswifty is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Appleton, Wisconsin
Posts: 72
Default Re: Sister\'s math problem X-post

I think the solution is 3*(26!)

(26!) is 26+25+24+23 etc...

and that answer is 1.20987438×10^27

I got that by counting all of the trianges in the top section (26) and multiplying it by 3... I could be way off...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-22-2005, 02:43 PM
J_V J_V is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,185
Default Thank you!!!!!

Much appreciated.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.