 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
See the attached image.
1) Calculate the area of the shaded part.
2) Take the integral part of the result, negate it, and use it as
longitude coordinates, in degrees. Take the two first digits after the
decimal point of the area and use them as latitude coordinates in
degrees. (Mathematically speaking, if the area is A, then latitude =
floor((A - floor(A))*100) degrees.)
3) These coordinates will point to a state in the US. Y = the year
when the capital city of this state was founded.
4) Take Y modulo 100 (iow. the last two digits) and substitute the
60.3 in the picture with this value.
5) The answer to the problem is the height h using this modified
value, with at least 5 decimals of accuracy (after the decimal point).
Post a reply to this message
Attachments:
Download 'GeometryProblem.png' (3 KB)
Preview of image 'GeometryProblem.png'
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tag povrayorg> wrote:
> See the attached image.
>
> 1) Calculate the area of the shaded part.
>
> 2) Take the integral part of the result, negate it, and use it as
> longitude coordinates, in degrees. Take the two first digits after the
> decimal point of the area and use them as latitude coordinates in
> degrees. (Mathematically speaking, if the area is A, then latitude =
> floor((A - floor(A))*100) degrees.)
>
> 3) These coordinates will point to a state in the US. Y = the year
> when the capital city of this state was founded.
>
> 4) Take Y modulo 100 (iow. the last two digits) and substitute the
> 60.3 in the picture with this value.
>
> 5) The answer to the problem is the height h using this modified
> value, with at least 5 decimals of accuracy (after the decimal point).
21.748904599
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Roman Reiner <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> 21.748904599
That would be correct.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote:
> Roman Reiner <lim### [at] gmxde> wrote:
> > 21.748904599
>
> That would be correct.
>
> --
> - Warp
Hooray! No one else? :)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Okay, I'll bite. It is in fact unsolvable?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
gregjohn <pte### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
> Okay, I'll bite. It is in fact unsolvable?
Why would you think so?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
