How many bowling balls are there?
How many bowling balls are there?
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Depends on whether it's hollow
over 9000
All bowling balls are hollow, dumbass.
A lot.
54+
45+
37+
30+
24+
19+
15+
12+
9+
3+
1+
=249
Eleventy seben?
Impossible to know or not. They may be glued together and therefor don't need the perceived stack. Also, we don't see the back end, if it's glued together it could have basically any shape on the back. If it's solid, and doesn't try to trick the viewer, it's possible to calculate, although I don't really wish to do so unless OP can confirm that we're not getting tricked.
Sup Forums nevere
So fucking wrong
en.wikipedia.org
Count yourself, faggot
If they are stacked then 269 ( Assuming they are in a pyramid formation )
81
165
this
165 if there's no trickery, newfags need to go back to school.
495?
165 my my count, assuming it is a triangular pyramid.
1
3
6
10
15
21
28
36
45
Nigga where the hell did you get 495?
I figured that it was a sign, seeing as that is both the weight of your mother and the number of times that i fucked her.
Mist be 83
The answer is definitely 330. No other answer.
214
My intuition suggests approximately 650
Pascal's Triangle to answer this, 165.
Bro, i used pascals triangle and got 330 the fuck are you talking about?
He was including the ones below ground level that we couldn't see. Kek
None. Those aren't bowling balls.
No tricking, found pic on web, being curious, asking fellow Sup Forumstards.
summation from i=1 to 9 of i!
This is correct.
Once you figure out the outside number, you add the number from 2 levels above it for the interior count of balls.
1
3
7 (6 on outside plus 1 for interior)
12 (9 on outside plus 3 for interior)
19 (12 outside plus 7 interior)
Etc etc.
That's the pattern.
Balls in one layer: (n^2+n)/2
(1+1)/2 = 1
(2^2+2)/2 = 3
(3^2+3)/2 = 6
(4^2+4)/2 = 10
(5^2+5)/2 = 15
(6^2+6)/2 = 21
(7^2+7)/2 = 28
(8^2+8)/2 = 36
(9^2+9)/2 = 45
1+3+6+10+15+21+28+36+45=165
There's 165 balls.
All of them
About 5
the summation of the third line of pascal triangle diagonally is the answer (since there are 9 rows of them that means you need to add 9 of the numbers)
Fucking moron
Can't be a triangle, look at marked angles. They are 45 degrees, more or less, hence square. If triangle, angles would be 60 degrees.
Fuck, forgot pic.....
>(4^2+4)/2 = 10
Look closely at that 4th layer - and then defend the notion of only 10 balls.
There are 81 visable bowling bowls, anything else is speculation.
Man, this ain't bowling balls!
This is a digital picture!
I threw it on the ground!
What, you think I'm stupid?
I'm not a part of your system
This pic is not a bowling ball!
DUH!
This
(4^2+4)/2
4^2=16
4^2+4 = 16+4 = 20
(4^2+4)/2 = 20/2 = 10
What are you talking about mate?
int amount = 0;
for (int i = 9; i > 0; --i)
{
for (int j = i; j > 0; --j)
{
amount = amount+j;
}
}
System.out.println("Amount: "+amount);
This says 165. Must be true.
165
#balls in a pyramidal stack
=
(n(n+1)(n+2))/6
= (9*10*11)/6
=165
assuming it's entirely bowling balls.. 165
assuming it isn't.. 81
so anywhere between 81 and 165
...
He means in the center of the pyramid, dumbass
81
no reason to assume balls that we can't see it could be a platform
thats gotta be at least ten.
You are a retard, do you know that? I know the maths when it comes to angles, you shithouse. I said they (the angles) looks like 45 degrees, rather than 60 degrees. And then it would be a square...... You are autist, fucking scumbag.
About as many as there are actual Hillary supporters.
1+3+6+10+15+21+28+36+45=165
fucking simple maths faggets
can't do progression
165
/thread
285 assuming it's filled in
4,762
165
somewhere around 200
gr8 b8 m8
I wouldnt be surprised if it was a square base, just photographed with a really wide angle lens.
>Triangle
What shitty camera did you use? I can't tell if the base is square or triangle.
Your theory checks out according to my calculations
man you're stupid.
165
THAT THREAD AGAIN
THERE IS NO WAY TO KNOW HOW MANY BALLS. THIS IS A PICTURE.
WE ARE NOT THERE TO COUNT THE BALLS.
385
My nigga
165 i think
Perspective. New word for you??
164, I stole one from the back
zero. those are jawbreakers.
The perspective is what I was calculating you retard
Hello, first time on the internet ? Welcome !
284
only the first two tiers are triangles, the rest are squares due to the angles of the wood stand
Why would they build a triangular frame in a square garden?
literally the correct answer
106
I dont know what yall are going on about, but this is clearly a 3 sided pyramid. angles should add to 180. 180/3 = 60 degree angles.
Enough
A tetrahedron actually. And its not particularly clear at all.
At least 12
>realizes how retarded he is, tries to normalize it by assuming people should have known he was retarded from the getgo
Hell, first time attempting Geometry? Welcome!
Yes, but the angles aren't 60 degrees
It has the shape of a four sided pyramid
faggot
Assuming it is a tetrahedron (triangle pyramid) and not hollow, we can see that the number of balls along one length (n) is 9. So the number of balls in the bottom layer is:
n(n+1)/2
or 9(9+1)/2
= 45
And the number of balls in the tetrahedron is:
n(n+1)(n+2)/6
or 9(9+1)(9+2)/6.
= 165
Maths fo' yo' ass!
Idiot, you don't calculate perspective, you have to find it with lines, like this. More or less precise, can't do it better, But no fucking way it is a square.
Nope, is square, there are no fucking 60 degrees cutting or corners.
Check just the front bottom 4 balls. If it was a 3 sided base the side balls would be touching at the back.
Besides im not sure that the balls would even stack neatly with a 3 sided base.
well the base of it is not square, and I can't say i know the math behind the perspective shit earlier but those angles are far bellow 90 degrees.
We can agree that there is 3 balls on the second to highest tier correct? if that's the case. it's 3 sided.
You didn't take into account that the house might be a triangle
>We can agree that there is 3 balls on the second to highest tier correct?
Nah
...
its simple 9+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1+8+7+6+5+4+3+2+1+7+6+5+4+3+2+1+6+5+4+3+2+1+5+4+3+2+1+4+3+2+1+3+2+1+2+1+1
Theres no way to find the dimension of the rear wall as its to see whether the front we are staring at also is how the rear side appears. However, theres no way the stucture could stand if it was in fact flat on the backside (or a triangle as some called it) simply because a straight up and down wall of balls would fail in this case.
the back wall must extend just as the side we are looking at does so id imagine its a square with 4 edges the 4th being identical to the one we see in the foreground of the photo except on the rear side.
why the hell would you say that anyways?
well assuming the left most side is perpendicular to the fence, then shouldn't the angle of the board on the right be parallel with the fence if it were a square base? it's not
...