How long until gender-segregated bathrooms are illegal? Reminder that "separate but equal" is NOT equal.
70
Hillary gets three supreme court nominations now, so soon.
>>79910993
>70
>>79911058
Are you from the South?
>>79911177
Prove that it's a trapezium fucktard.
>>79910853
>The shape cannot be a trapezoid with the given dimensions
>BUT THE POINT IS JUST TO HAVE THE STUDENT USE A FORMULA, STOP BEING AUTISTIC
>It's not a trapezoid so the formula doesn't apply to this shape
>SHUT UP AUTIST IT'S FOR FUCKING 1ST GRADERS, JUST APPLY THE FORMULA AND MOVE ON
Ok, now that we have that out of the way we can address OP's topic of discussion: depends who our next president is
>>79910853
A= where the fuck is A?
>>79911177
The point is that, that trapezoid is impossible because of the hypotenuse of that triangle can't be 8. A 5,2,8 triangle is geometrically impossible.
However everyone needs to calm the fuck down, the digit 8 isn't needed to some the trapezoid
>>79911339
there is no combination of numbers for that quadrilateral that works with the information provided
>>79911177
Is c=d ?
>>79911387
It is an isoceles trapezoid.
>>79911642
It's literally not
>>79911642
the problem is that the shape cannot have those dimensions on a 2d plain.
>>79911878
Yes it can because it is theoretical.
>>79911855
A+ work
Clearly explains it.
>>79911855
Finally someone posted this, I was getting annoyed with the people saying 70
>>79910853
So it's not to scale. Who fucking cares?
>>79912174
It is a troll image. The boxes are bigger for 1 to 8.
>>79911855
hehehe it is much simpler to just use the Pythagorean theorm.
the right triangles on the side would have the dimensions of 5 2 and 8
so given that 25 + 4 != 64 it is impossible.
>>79912043
read >>79912285
>>79912285
>right triangles
There are none.
>>79912537
>being this retarded
the height is perpendicular to the base meaning that there is a right triangle in where the side is the hypotenuse and the height is a side.
>>79911532
Not a shoop or anything
>>79911387
Geometry ain't just using a formula. That's the whole point actually, that objects in space have these special properties. In any case Common Core is an abomination.
>>79913401
>Geometry ain't just using a formula
But it is for people that have like one class and that's it. Honestly I have a bachelors in accounting and the last time I had to calculate the area of something was back in maybe 9th grade.
>>79912043
Theoretical doesn't mean obeying no rules. If there were no rules, there would be little to say about it, and nothing math could do for it. There is nothing there to suggest it is not intended to be a 2-dimensional euclidean object. And in all reason, that's what should be assumed, in absence of the actual context, given that non-euclidean geometries are not treated in American schools and that even euclidean spatial geometries beyond spheres, cones and cylinders are almost entirely ignored, except for maybe in IB, AP or honors Calculus and calc-prep (elfunc when I was there) and Physics.
Anyway, the formula you applied, or rather had Google apply is based upon the same assumptions of euclidean planarity.
>>79913561
>bachelors in accounting
So what's that like? Just apply formula's blindly to spreadsheets and Boom! Enron!. Boom! Lehman Brothers in chapter 7!. ;) Boom! Real estate bubble bursts!
Or am I being to mean? Please tell me that I am.
>>79911576
False.
>>79916639
Is that the complete set? Somebody send it to the Common Core assholes, fast!
i-its 80 isn't it? What are you guys arguing about?
>>79910853
>this fucking thread again
>>79916639
ayy solidworks?
>>79916887
That is the upper and lower bound of all possible areas. Though the decimal approximations aren't right because whoever made it is an idiot. The lower limit approaches A=sqrt(1008)=31.749015733 from above. The upper limit is A=40+sqrt[((20+sqrt(25+(16-sqrt39)^2))/2)(((20+sqrt(25+(16-sqrt39)^2))/2)-(sqrt(25+(16-sqrt39)^2)))(((20+sqrt(25+(16-sqrt39)^2))/2)-12)(((20+sqrt(25+(16-sqrt39)^2))/2)-8)]=82.684891941.
>>79917444
Actually nvm those decimal approximations are right. I think there was some other image that an anon made where they weren't quite right.
>>79910853
>That fucking trapezoid.
This is what I think of common core.
>>79916898
fag
