If Bob willfully breaks your legs without provocation, which leads you to being unable to work...

If Bob willfully breaks your legs without provocation, which leads you to being unable to work, and you are resultantly starving to death, would you then be justified in stealing a loaf of bread from Bob so as to prevent yourself from starving?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=X09oxyIeGuY
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Bob just violated the NAP....

no you deserve to just starve to death lmao

The answer to OP's pic is 70.

laws of nature says you may, laws of man says you cant.

If bob breaks my legs then he better kill me before I recover because I'll take a lot more than his fucking bread.

bob does sound like a total douche..

breaking a mans legs without provocation sound like he is kind of a psycho

Yes, clearly. The question is whether or not Bob has forfeited his right to his bread when he violated the NAP.
The 'laws' of man are irrelevant.
Like what, his virginity?

why is this a thanks common core???
>5x8=40
>12x5=60
>40+60=100

2*5 = 10, 12*5 = 60, 60+10 = 70

I don't understand what the image is bitching about.

2+2 IS 4, MINUS 1 THAT'S THREE QUICK MATHS
EVERY DAY MAN'S ON THE ROAD. SMOKE TREES.

>American education

8 is the hypotenuse not the width

>16-12=4
>4/2=2
>2^2+5^5=29
>sqrt(29)=5.385
>5.385≠8

if only the laws of nature apply, than you must take more than a loaf of bread in order to survive.
the laws of nature are simply that only the ones that are strong or adapt survive.

therefore, you MUST steal the bread

loooooooooooooooooooool

pythagoras rotting in his grave

Checked and confirmed.

Can't you split it into two triangles and a rectangle? Or are they illegal triangles?

>his right to his bread when he violated the NAP.
Yes, you lose all rights when you violate the NAP.

how do you steal from a dead guy?

It's 76

you guys are idiots

5^2+x^2=8^2
25+x^2=81
x^2=56
x=7.5

now you find the area of the triangles
5*7.5=37.5

now you find the area of the rectangle in the middle
16-7.5-7.5=1
5*1=5

now you add
5+37.5=42.5 sq ft

the triangles have width 2 and height 5, but hypotenuse 8, which is impossible. If you solve the question with subtraction, you get a different answer than if you solve it with trig. It's a poorly designed, false question of an impossible shape.

That's what I thought, something seemed off with the triangle at first sight

Dumbass goy.

You kill him and take all his bread for violating the NAP

You can, or you can do 2 rectangles because 2 of the same right angle triangles is a rectangle.

12x12 + 2x5 = 144 + 10 = 154

So even a very minor violation of the NAP means forfeiture of all rights? So all crimes, even the most minor of crimes, should be punishable by death?

>he thinks 8^2 is 81

I'm assuming you're joking and you know there's two solutions because the triangle is bad, but let's assume poe's law and that you're a dumbass.

Trapezium. Sides have the same hypotenuse length .: symmetrical. In what world would you bother solving a quadratic when you can just say 16-12 = 4 -> 4/2 = 2, 2*5=10?

>burger education

I still have no idea how the fuck common core was supposed to be better

idiots

I took the two 8x5x2 triangles and made them a 5 x 2 rectangle to put with the 12 x 12 square.

Consider the triangles... Right angled triangles...

Sides 5, 2 and 8.

Think of pythagoras...

Do you see it yet?

I didn't even bother with the trangles since there were two equal ones that make a rectangle.

>12x12 square

how fucking retarded do you have to be to think 8 squared is 81? You dumb motherfucker

>2^2
>2 to the power of 2
> = 4

>5^5
>5 to the power of 5
> = 3125

still, your heart's in the right place

yes faggot

>were two equal ones
please point them out

LOSE. ALL. RIGHTS

Wrong.
The 12 x 12 square in the middle is already 144 in area.

for all the faggots that got baited by the op pic

as mildly amusing and autistic as this is, it runs off two assumptions:
1. The bottom left triangle is a right angled triangle. There's no parallel line indications in the diagram, nor is there a right angle square in there, so there's no reason if you're going to completely distort the shape to assume that it's right angle on the left side and not the right side, and not something scalene.
2. The trapezium very clearly has an acute facing angle on the right size. Even if the exact length of the acute angle isn't known, it's going to be between pi/2 radians, it isn't going to jump over into the top right quadrant.

So, autism for no reason. Assumption 1 was assumed for no reason, property 2 was ignored when it has justification.

The 8 is irrelevant information anyways.

>12 x 12 square
you mean 12 X 5

Its a 12 by 5 rectangle my guy as this stuff is never drawn to scale

Underrated

>irrelevant information
the 8's stop it from being a paralellogram, so thay aint irrelevant

something can't be underrated if it was posted like 5 seconds ago, faggot

actually the math is for largest valid area from given information

you're just projecting

This is correct

and the reason for
>Thanks, Common Core!
Is because CC is less concerned with teaching how to get the correct answer and more concerned with teaching students to how to think about solving problems, resulting in shit like this making it into the curriculum.

There are some CC concepts that are actually valuable (the gathering 10s thing), but teaching them as core arithmetic is short-sighted and the result of a standardized test -centric mentality (higher scores on standardized tests = more tax money for school districts). It conflicts with fundamentals that should be established well before moving on to advanced math. It will work for some kids, but fail many others.

This. That should be all you need to know, OP. No one cares about the loaf of bread, if the mother fucker is trying to kill you.

Now if it's a family heirloom you've stolen, despite him being a piece of shit, and you killing him, you shouldn't steal from his family who is innocent.

wrong

You don't use them at all in the equation, so yes, they are irrelevant. You're just retarded.

>mfw everyones answer is different.

Atleast I'm not gonna pretend like I know. You niggers don't even seem to know

I should be justified in the retaliatory execution of Bob and following acquisition of his entire estate

Which means I can kill Bob with one of my recreational nukes.

Absolutely not
But if Bob was a good man he would be a church goer and a family man respected by his community. If his legs got FUBAR his church, his extended family, and his community would take care of him.

>would you then be justified
who cares about this stupid shit

>in the equation
you do realize that your just justifying the contempt for common core if you only think in prescribed formulas right?

also its physically impossible to be a trapezoid, so your formula is not applicable.
irrelevant info trumps formula when it causes impossible structures

...

what if bob was jewish and didnt go to church?

...

Justified? Depends who you ask. Would I do it? Fuck yes.

>triangle of 2, 5 and 8

>a 5x12 rectangle becomes 12x12

please draw me a triangle like that, to scale

also how does 2+10+2 = 16?

[spoiler]yes i know you are baiting[/spoiler]

Yeah it's 70

Duh that is simpler. But it is 14 x 5.

Wait.. fuck. It is a 12 x 5 rectangle in the middle with a 2 x 5 rectangle which the would make up that 14 x 5 one.

Fuck. I am in the bathtub before bed. I am not thinking math well.

the 8's prevent this from being a parallelogram

also I am like three drinks in

...

Is it not 80?

Rectangle=60
Triangle1= 10
Triangle2= 10

you still didn't draw a 2,5,8 triangle to scale

jidf finds himself momentarily lucid and off topic, and still sticks out like a sore thumb

draw a 2, 5, 8 triangle to scale

haha burger education is shit

Common core, aka Nigger Maff.
youtube.com/watch?v=X09oxyIeGuY

You can't assume the second triangle being identical to the right unless you assume the straight looking angles are indeed straight. If the angles are anything and you only have the given sides, you can arrange the sides in range of different ways, giving different total areas each.

The problem is literally impossible, however, if you just plug and chug, you wouldn't know. Cuckservashits hate it because it makes them feel stupid for not being able to critically think.

...

>The problem is literally impossible
Not impossible, just not a parallelogram

The shape is impossible. A triangle with height 5 and hypotenuse 8 has base sqrt(8^2 - 5^2) ~= 6.24

16-12 != 6.24

You can't solve it you fuckwit. That's the "joke".

...

a right-triangle I mean.

This nigga gets minus 1 for 5^5, but you pass

the 2,5,8 triangle is impossible, (if you don't use complex numbers),
the questions quadrilateral is not impossible, nor is it a complex area

just remove the 8's and everything is fine (answer 70)

fuck. go home. i'm drunk.

Is everyone trolling or is the fact that the area of a trapezoid is simply 0.5(base1+base2)h not taught anymore? the answer is 70 btw

thats a projecting autist who doesn't know that you solve for area bounds when given a math problem like this irl

82~ is the MAX area for all the given data

oh fuck. I'm out. I could barely do the equal one.

the 8's stop it from being a parallelogram
read the fucking thread first

The answer is 70, the measurement given of 8 is erroneous. You only need the height and length of base and top.

the problem with this image is that the hypotenuse of the "triangles" on the sides should be sqrt(29) and not 8.
but then autism

It is if it has a height of 5 as listed since that would cause it to contain the impossible triangle.

If you ignore that 5 it is actually solvable (the correct height is ~7.75)

the 8's are not erroneous, they are a litmus test to separate idiots from real people

See
Thanks, common core!

ignoring data fails you irl

stop trying to fit this into a formula, thats the whole meme's critique of common core