>need TV licenses
>can't use weapons to defend themselves
>will get v& for using weapons in self defense
Is the United Kingdom literally the most cucked nation on Earth? It's literally more cucked than Sweden.
Pic unrelated.
first post best post
>>70010581
Is the problem on that pic supposed to be difficult?
>>70010581
is this real?
what's wrong with the pic in the op?
>>70010757
Or maybe because it's easy... I don't get it... It might be that "common core" don't teach how to solve this or something. I don't understand the joke.
>>70010757
>>70010882
16-12 = 4
4^2 +5^2 = 8^2 according to the picture.
>>70010757
No it's supposed to be impossible.
>>70010814
Is what real? The OP post is real, the UK really is that cucked. I've heard conflicting information on what situations you can use wepaons for self defense (some britbongs say if you're in your own home and have weapons at home, you can use them to stop a break in; others say that's illegal) but you definitely can't legally carry weapons away from home in the UK.
If you are asking about the OP picture: The OP picture is from a United States college math worksheet.
>>70010581
(B+b)xh/2
burgers cant into math so they blame the government
>>70010882
>>70010757
That figure is impossible
>>70010975
>being this retarded
Even if you're assuming it's a trapezium (which it's not confirmed to be) it would be a 2 not a 4 you idiot.
>>70011005
That's the trapezium formula, it doesn't work for other quadrilaterals you idiot.
>>70011030
No it's not it's just unsolvable and in reality it looks more like pic related.
>>70010757
retard
>>70010757
>>70010882
>>70010935
The point is that you can't have a trapezoid with those dimensions, mainly the 8 unit parts
>>70011087
You idiot the shape is a bit off but you dont need to worry about it. The answer is 70. Period.
>>70011046
You are correct about the 2, but it's sides are the same length so it's an isosceles trapezoid. Which does make the shape impossible given those numbers.
>>70010975
2^2 + 5^2 = 8^2 is what it's saying, anon, not 4^2. still wrong though
>>70011282
Go on then show your work faggot, I bet you 6 million shekels that you can't prove the area is 70.
>>70011418
Sides being the same length is not the only requirement of a isosceles trapezium, the other requirement is that the other two sides (in this case it would be the 12 and the 16) be parallel. Prove that they are parrallel.
Protip: You can't, but I can prove that they're not.
>>70011606
So your argument is that the shape that was put on the test is inaccurate instead of the numbers. I'm glad we agree that the question is bullshit.
>>70010665
time to go back, kiddo
>>70010757
>pollacks
>not being inbred retards
>>70011606
The formula is: (Big base + small base) times the height over 2. (12+16)times 5/2 = 70
You dont need to get the 8's involved and the bases are parrallel.
>>70010581
You posted this yesterday.
Fuck off.
>>70011717
Yes. The shape actually looks roughly like >>70011126 and is therefore unsolvable. Some people say to use Brahmagupta's formula but that only works for cyclic quadrilaterals. Basically imagine the shape in that pic but slide the point where the 5 line hits the 16 line while at the same time tilting the 8 lines (and the 12 line with them). Meaning there are infinity shapes with those dimensions.
Btw, I know the people that made the problem intended it to be a trapezium and just fucked up the dimensions. But since they didn't confirm 12/16 to be parallel or 5/16 to make a right angle, it's technically not confirmed a trapezium and therefore can exist, just as an unsolvable problem.
>>70011810
>The formula is: (Big base + small base) times the height over 2.
That is the trapezium formula. It doesn't work for all quadrilaterals, only trapeziums.
>You dont need to get the 8's involved
It doesn't matter if they are involved because the problem is unsolvable even with them.
>the bases are parrallel.
Prove it.
>>70011962
I think the most sensible fuckup they would have made would be that the top or bottom number was made wrong, but that's possible to.
>>70012072
You're fucking autistic retards.
Occams razor.
The simplest answer is that the professor fucked up on the scaling, and provided extra information on a middle school geometry test. Looking at the shape the most obvious answer is that he meant for it to be a trapezoid, and not the shape given in this post>>70011126
Teachers fuck up, but this isn't the usual common core bullshit, that's all im saying.
>>70012288
But it's NOT a trapezium, a trapezium cannot exist with those dimensions. It's a quadrilateral with an infinite possible number of areas. Fuck off retard.
>autistic
Are you FUCKING retarded? Autists are incompetent idiots with short attention spans and minimal problem solving capabilities. I and the other anons ITT who agree with me on the problem are the polar FUCKING opposite of autistic.
>>70012835
That's exactly the kind of thing an autist would say. Have you ever been tested?
>>70012835
You're getting angry and ignoring what I'm saying in my post. If you're not autistic, you're socially incompetent, and if you're not that, then you're under 15.
Read my post again, everything that needs to be said on the topic is there.
This is not common core shit, just a simple teacher's mistake, and I'm providing the simplest explanation of what the teacher could possibly need in this exercise.
>>70013217
Look up the definition of autism dumbfuck.
>>70013274
>autistic
No, I'm the opposite, re-read my fucking post dumbass. I'm the polar fucking opposite of autistic.
>socially incompetent
Kind of, but that's irrelevant.
>under 15
No.
>This is not common core shit, just a simple teacher's mistake, and I'm providing the simplest explanation of what the teacher could possibly need in this exercise.
The shape is not a fucking trapezium, go fucking kill yourself.
>>70013276
>>70013397
I don't know, you sound pretty autistic to me. Do your parents ever give you a weird look when you're done talking?
Would you be able to recognize if they did?
>>70013274
STFU stupid olive nigger
The problem is fucked, and for all your supposed greek contribution to mathematics you can't spot a problem out of whack.
While the two triangles work out nice, the bottom dimension is the problem
>>70013521
>I don't know, you sound pretty autistic to me.
Do you know what autistic means, dumbass? Autists are too stupid to even reason about geometric and mathematical problems.
>Do your parents ever give you a weird look when you're done talking?
No.
>Would you be able to recognize if they did?
Yes.
>>70013397
This is the internet anon, I will not adhere to the literal definition of an autist when I'm calling someone that.
The fact that you get so worked up about meaningless shit like this though, shows that something is wrong, whatever you wanna call it.
Me and the majority of people here call it autism to save time.
>>70013397
>The shape is not a fucking trapezium, go fucking kill yourself.
It sure looks like it in the shape provided, and that is why I am saying that the teacher fucking up is a simple mistake.
>>70013771
How do you know the bottom dimension is wrong and not the top?
Maybe both bases are correct, and the issue is with the sidelines.
You're too focused on the tree that you're missing the forest, I'm simply saying this is not common core, rather a simple teacher's mistake.
>>70013793
Oh, well in that case I'm sure there's nothing to worry about. They've probably just learned to live with you.
>>70013799
>This is the internet anon, I will not adhere to the literal definition of an autist when I'm calling someone that.
Then you're a fucking newfag fucktard obsessed with reddit-tier 2016 buzzwords and don't even use them in their proper context. Fucking kill yourself. Literally fucking kill yourself in real life.
>The fact that you get so worked up about meaningless shit like this though, shows that something is wrong, whatever you wanna call it.
Since it's an amoral issue, 'wrong' is subjective. If you think something is wrong with me that's fine, that's your opinion, but my trait that you view as 'wrong' is absolutely not autism and you are objectively incorrect for claiming that it is autism. Kill yourself.
>Me and the majority of people here call it autism to save time.
No, you and the other fucktard newfags from reddit. If you had been on 4chan for long you'd know that people only started using that word for anything other than what it truly means in very recent times. If you want to 'save time' then call it fucking OCD (which isn't actually a disorder, by the way), because even though that's still fairly inaccurate, it's a FUCK of a lot closer to being accurate than 'autism'.
>It sure looks like it in the shape provided, and that is why I am saying that the teacher fucking up is a simple mistake.
And in fucking up the teacher also created an unsolvable problem with infinity possible solutions. How stupid are you to not understand this?
>>70014170
>And in fucking up the teacher also created an unsolvable problem with infinity possible solutions. How stupid are you to not understand this?
Of which I'm pointing out the simplest one, which is the one he probably meant for the kids at middle school.
>rest of the drivel
If claiming seniority over me gives you some sort of authority which you use to get off or something then fine. I've been on and off this site and this board specifically since 2011. I don't remember if, when and why ''autist'' entered 4chan vernacular. But I'm here enough to know that your reaction is not healthy, in case you're not a troll.
>>70010581
2*5 = 10 cm^2
12 * 5 = 60 cm^2
70 cm^2
>>70014598
What you're seeing is a common side effect from coming on here too often. It's sad, really. But there's nothing we can do about cases like these but show love and understanding whenever possible.
Watch the "Trump Effect" before EA takes it off of YouTube forever!...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7F082JKzJqE
>>70010581
That does not add up
>>70014740
I'd just put it as (16*5+12*5)/2 so it's a bit more obvious.
I have no idea what common core is but it seems to be really effective at making ameritards unable to solve little kid tier problems
