Why has pronoun culture taken over society to such an extent? When will it end...

>what is non-Euclidian geometry

Yeah because I fucking glanced at the problem once retard.

70m2

a concept that isn't taught to children you autistic fuckhead, give me a non-euclidean space where triangles behave that way, you can't

I failed the shit out of Geometry, but should it be A=140?

because it's not to scale? Replace the numbers with whatever you want, the question is testing if you know how to solve it. What am I missing?

I'll give that to you. Out of context, but technically correct.

DON'T JUST PLUG INTO FORMULAS YOU SHITTER, ACTUALLY THINK ABOUT PROPERTIES OF TRIANGLES AND YOU'LL SEE THIS SHAPE IS IMPOSSIBLE

DOES NOBODY KNOW THE FUCKING TRIANGLE INEQUALITY?

Also this. I took common core math and I probably had bs like this thrown at me without realizing it and got As.

White people should always be referred to as Sir or Madam. Don't mispronoun White people.

Good job proving my point.
"I'm American and I am too lazy to even look at a problem properly before blurting out what seems like it might possibly be an answer."

>70
>t. NPC

Wha... No wrong again

If it's not to scale, then you cannot get a specific solution, only a range of possible solutions.

>No angles, parallel lines, or length of diagonals given
This is impossible

Finding the area isn't hard but of what object?
The triangle? Or the trapezoid?

A triangle can easily behave that way in a curved non-Euclidian space, autistic fuckhead.

No it can't, I've already tried this problem in curved spaces and on spheres and shit

What trapezoid?

Hur dur the triangles arent right!!!!!

Fuck off just add an i.

So 14x5 = 70i

Of course if you solve it a diffent way you may get a different answer. That way the teacher can mark you wrong it right depending on your race!

It's a convenient (((distraction))) from the real issues facing working people.

If the side of length 8 is on a curved surface and the sides of length 2 and 5 are on non-curved surfaces then it can exist.

No one gives a shit that you figured it out after 5 minutes and a piece of paper and I looked at it once and didn't think much of it.

Attached: 5888.jpg (1000x932, 330K)

Isosceles trapezium is implied. Two sides parallel but unequal the non parallel ones are equal. It is has an axis of symmetry and any geometric element can be calculated if you know 4 independent elements (for example the sides)

I'm autistic when it comes to shapes and geometry, that's one reason I failed the whole class, I can't understand it UNLESS YOU TELL ME HOW TO DO EACH FUCKING PROBLEM. Okay guy? Relax.

nice honeypot

Why is the font of the 16 on the bottom so much bigger than the font of the 12 on the top? Photosho...? Oh, hehe.

You know, that the whole object in that image is called a trapezoid, right?
Wikipedia says that you call thrm trapezium though

>discord
no thanks, i dont want to be connected to any more botnets than i already am

Correction:For an isosceles you need 3 more independent qualities (the parallel sides and equal non parallel are 2 such things, and any quadrilateral is solvable with exactly 5 independent geometric numbers)

5×12
60
16-12
4
4×5=20/2=10
10×2+60
80a^2

No, that object is not a trapezoid/trapezium.

Nigga, lurn yo-self sumfing 'bout an over-constrained geometry.

Attached: Untitled.png (874x644, 222K)

Attached: math.png (1092x609, 523K)

Fucking retards, just use pythagoras on the triangle, the proportions are incorrect. This shape cannot exist.

I learned something today

Attached: trap.png (798x238, 21K)

Forgot to add all of the numbers
the overall area is about 84.3954+2.5sqrt(39)
or about 100

Yes, it is.
It is a trapezium isoceles even if the numbers they put in the triangle are retarded and don't make sense

70

That picture is a photoshop. The real photo is of a dead seal.

Attached: jacek-hugo-bader-was-a-leader-of-black-lives-matter-poland-13960433.png (500x731, 166K)

Bongs hate the English language.
>"public" schools are private
>transliteration is translation
>trapezoids are trapeziums

B...but its right there on the page!
How can it not be real if its RIGHT THERE??

A trapezium is a 4-sided figure with two parallel sides which are not equal in length, and with the two non-parallel sides being equal in length. The figure in the OP does not meet these criteria. Fuck off dumbfuck

Who did this

Gender Studies Ph.D. detected..

#s are off. shape is impossible to make in 2d plane

...

Note that this is just one method to attempt to solve it.

To solve the area, we must split the shape into objects we can easily calculate - two triangles, and a square. The square's dimensions are defined by the problem, so we get 5 x 12 = 60.

But what about the triangle? With the dotted line, it's a right triangle. We subtract 16 from 12 to get 4,and divide it equally between both sides to get 2. 2 x 5 = 10/2 = 5, but since we have 2 triangles, it multiplies out to 10, for a total of 70.

However, the pythagorean theorum states that the square of a triangle's longest side equals the sum of the squares of its other two side, or a^2 + b^2 = c^2. plugging in our numbers, 2^2 + 5^2 = 29, and 8^2 =64.

Don't measure the physical angles of the picture like a dumbass. The proportions of the triangle are wrong. The 'correct' answer is 70, but the dimensions given in the problem are impossible.

>no kid left behind implemented so jews don't feel like the absolute retards they are
>every kid is left behind

>tfw forgot how to find the area of a shape

JUST FUCK MY SHIT UP

>Why has pronoun culture taken over society to such an extent?

"Pronoun culture" is really just brown people culture. The less white we get, the stupider everything is going to become.

Thank you for the explanation

unsolvable, as b^2 is an irrational number (root39) that does not equal 1/2 of the difference of 16 and 12.

this is a trick question.

that's not the point, if you're using formulas to solve this you're doing it wrong. It's testing basic problem solving skills, it's probably an impossible triangle on purpose to prevent you from using formulas.

Hahahaha

Ah poor you, In common core there are no tricks!

common core is shit, but A=70, brainlet

Alternatively, we can work backwards to determine the length of the line between the end of the shape and the dotted line, and it's still wrong.

C^2-B^2 = A^2, so 64 - 25 = 39, which comes out to 6.2 Both triangles have this length in their sides before it touches the square, but 2x + 12 = 16. 6.2 is how long it'd be if it was a real, Euclidian triangle, but the lower parallel line is too short.

You think it's wrong, but actually that isn't a right angle. Just lazy drawing.

100. shape isnt to scale
remind me of pic related

Attached: poles.jpg (533x459, 17K)

>change 8s to 6s
>fix Jow Forumss autism
>literally doesn't change the answer

You fucking kids lmao

>5x12=60
>5x2=10
>c^2=64
>64-25=39
>root39x5=31.225
>31.225+60=91.225

trick question. the problem is unsolvable.

Have you ever had pussy?

see

because most objects arent drawn to scale because its a fucking example

Poles are 0ft apart duh

1 foot

Is this even solvable?

>an impossible triangle
>All triangles in my image were possible
>Find the area of a scalene triangle with no height given without using trig or any formula
What could he mean by this?

Nope, 5-2 = 3 = 6/2, the rope is hanging straight down

retard. look at the picture. they clearly arent

I saw that and just assumed that maybe the shape isn't symmetrical. But if so it's not possible to solve the problem.

So, that sucks

I dropped out of school in 7th grade and never studied anything math related until ~2 weeks before taking my GED and I passed it all first try. It made me feel like a cheating nigger. I think our education is really dumbed down for minorities.

Attached: 1536041456888.jpg (1494x1454, 154K)

>I can't understand it UNLESS YOU TELL ME HOW TO DO EACH FUCKING PROBLEM.
You need to slow the fuck down and think about and REVIEW each thing that is being explained and work through examples that use each property.

Area of a trapezoid formula

you are wrong

Have you ever learned trigonometry?

no. the measurements are irrational.

I am 36 but this was common practice back then. I think the idea was to prevent people from eyeballing it and then working backwards towards a solution.

It's an exploded view dickshit, pull your head out of your ass and ask whether your autism is actually relevant to solving the problem for once

NO, IT IS AN IMPOSSIBLE TRAPEZOID MADE FROM IMPOSSIBLE TRIANGLES WITH NO SOLUTION FOR AN AREA

it's 16x5=80.

translate left triangle to right, you get 16x5 rectangle.

fuck of npc
i trust my eyes over what you say and i see the poles have a nonzero distance between them

Except no triangle can have those measures you fuck

OP, when making a thread or contributing to one, make sure the image isn't something like this. People will get off topic and begin debating the image rather than what you intended. It would be better if you had an image of some SJW person instead

Why do you still have the x axis length as 16 after shortening it?

see cut off the triangle, swap it onto the other side and turn it into a rectangle. Calculate area of the rectangle. That's what they're looking for, and any other way to solve it doesn't work.
Probably on purpose.

You idiots. The answer is 70. They gave you the bases and the height. Did you ever stop to think that the angles are not drawn accurately since they didn't need to because they already gave you the dimensions?

Write a proof instead of SCREECHING LIKE AN AUTISTIC FUCKFACE

this has to be bait