What if Bernie wins?

What if Bernie wins?

...

I'm pretty sure it's base X height divided by 2

in your wet dreams, yankee

4 years of not understanding reality politics.

(16+12)/2*5==gender equality (for swerige)
also ficki-ficki for the german wurstfresser

mean of base and top times height

It's fucked because the middle section = 12 leaving 1.5 for each base of the right triangle.

But A^2 + B^2 should = C^2.

Although, this would be a spug point to make. Maybe point it out on the test, but then just do what they want and use the formula for triangle area X 2 plus the area of a 12 by 5 rectangle.

A=14*5=70
EZ

How can you find the area of an impossible object?

(5*5)+(2*2) =/= 64

Literally impossible

8^2 - 5^2 = 39
sqrt(39) = 6,2
6,2 + 6,2 + 12 =/= 16

Fixed

I got the same area by breaking up the different regions and summing the areas together.

By making it possible!

>16-12 = 3

good job murca

70.

5 X 12 = 60
2 X 5 = 10

60 + 10 = 70

The area of the object is 70

Why break anything tho? Both sides are same length (8), so that means the bottoms of these sides are also the same. The bottom side is 4 wider than top, so that means 2 on each side. Two sides are halves of a whole, so you can just add them together and make a 14 by 5 rectangle.

70

1.5? You mean 2? No idea where you got 1.5. The top of the trapezoid is 12, so 12 -16 = 4, divide 4 by two and you get 2. the base of each triangle is 2.

Because by the bounds of the problem the object is no longer a trapezoid

Yea, i understand that you turned the shape into a parallelogram. I just chose to break it up by regions.

two triangles make rectangle

add both rectangles = 70

or you could do pythagoras but if you're good at ps...

Americans doing math...
Good god, it hurts to breathe.

if Bernie wins then 70?
are you saying Bernie will fuck up the laws of math?
okay Shlomo

except its the square root of 29 you dingus

why did they make the problem such fucking aids

Is anyone else the type of person that would have spent the entire test in 2nd grade writing a detailed explanation why this question is retarded?

> 8^2-5^2=29
> goddamn stupid americans meme

draw a triangle with the following lengths

2
5
8

a square is a special case of a rectangle, which is a special case of a parallelogram. And that is a special case of a trapezoid, along with rhombus.

Feel free to show off you space program some day, Poland.

inb4 he draws an equilateral triangle and just puts the numbers in at random

lollłł

With mathematics skills like yours he's got far more of a chance of being involved in a space program.

Unless the NASA are looking for another chimp to send up

I DID IT GUYS

I'm starting to think the world education rankings are accurate.

SHIT I JUST NOTICED THAT IT IS AN IMPOSSIBLE SHAPE.
GOD DAMN.

>he thinks problem diagrams are accurately represented

Did you muiss the part at the start of every exam that said "diagrams not to scale"?

>muiss

the shape is impossible the third side of the triangle doesn't add up to the length of the bottom part of the trapezoid

Well they represent it as a rectangular triangle (or whatever is the correct term in english) save for the little rectangular angle, but none of the angles are indicated. Might as well assume the two sides aren't necessarily parallel, and then it's impossible to calculate.

feel free to stop using the metric system for yours any time murica

At least we had a polish person in space already. Which is more than 80% of countries in the world can say.

I think we can assume the top + bottom are parallel as the dotted line denotes a perpendicular bisector which intersects them both.

This is needlessly complicated AND wrong.

Each end is a triangle with a square in the middle.

The square is 12x5 = 60
The triangles are each 5x2/2, so 5 for each, 10 total
10 + 60 = 70.

Whoever did this graphic is either a troll or retarded. This is sixth grade math.

16-sqrt(39)-12 is -2.24 meaning its still an impossible object.

They are, but you guys gotto dismiss them cause "murica ain't #1!"

Do Pythagoras' theorem on the triangle

the height would be like 7.7 or something.

5-8-2 is not a right triangle.

I've got the lines on the outside to be something like 5.3 rather than 8 (presuming 12,15 & 5 are correct).

I don't know why I'm arguing math on a cambodian basket weaving forum, but TECHNICALLY if you follow standard conventions, the problem is possible. All of the outer side lengths aren't to scale, and the angles aren't marked so so we shouldn't assume that they aren't drawn accurately either. The dotted line coming off of the base can generally be assumed to be perpendicular to the base. From here, you can split the whole thing up into two right triangles and a scalene triangle. The shape looks nothing like a rhombus, but the area is definitely calculable.

Here you go

/thread

The thing you're missing.. The thing everyone is arguing about... is that it's impossible for c & d to = 8

Well no it isn't c+d could both equal 8 if other values were different.

Its an impossible shape, picking 2 of the values at random and saying there random is meaningless.

Because they dont want children learning anything even remotely approaching real knowledge

Common core is the most blatant "fuck the peasants, give them shit education" push Ive ever seen in the modern school system

I worded this badly but, yeah, if the base was 26 all other values could remain the same and the shape would be possible.

Both sides can equal 8, if other values are changed, singling them out and specifiying them as wrong is strange.

>Hemiptera Germanicus

Is this a good way to learn formulas

Just realised I fucked up 64-25 = 39 not 49 lol

anyway still impossible with root39 instead of 7 as the triangle's base's

flip the triangle to make a rectangle
height is 5
width is 16
5*16=80

America is a huge country remember
We have our population of retards and rejects just like you do

It is not a 2D object! That would be too easy.

Grab a ruler and try to draw this figure

Math memeing aside, he'll probably shut down a great deal of the NSA's surveillance programs.

Not only has he been vocally anti surveillance, but he's voted no on every single piece of surveillance legislation in the past 2 decades or so (Patriot act, CISA, renewl of section 215, freedom act, the recent two patriot act expansions, etc)

Says a lot about the sorry state of US politcs that a socialist is the only one of two cannidates alongside rand paul that supports the 4th amendment.

the square between the traingles is 12*5 = 60

need the base of the triangles

12 is the line without the bases
16 is the line with the bases
so their combined bases are 4 so each base is 2
(2*5)/2 = 5 so each triangle area is 5

60+10 = 70

the area of the shape is 70

diagram NOT TO SCALE nor does the question mention SQUARES, TRIANGLES or TRAPEZIUMS,

=

no angles are regular,
this user provided a better diagram to work from C:

i want to see all your working

the shape is physically impossible so trying to analyze its geometry makes no sense and doing so will give inconsistent answers depending on how you try to do it

10/10 polan can into funny