EvoN1020v

Is it true that when 1-butanol in the "presence" with sulfuric acid, it will produces water and 1-butene in an elimination reaction?

I concur with DoG. I couldn't stop thinking about this problem for the last 2 days, so I just decided to actual draw the triangles and see how it makes out. I just divided the lengths by 100 and the numbers behaved as centrimeters. Also, I used a projector (spelling?) for the correct drawing of the angles.

In my conclusion, either A or C are correct.

You're absolutely right doG. Also I checked the x = sin44(167.84) and it yielded 116.591409, compare to 116.5932205 for x = sin21(325.345).

Also, I checked the confirmation of the left small triangle using one of the trigonometric laws: [math]C^{2} = A^{2} + B^{2}-2ABsinC[/math].

[math]C^{2} = 183^{2} + 167.84^{2} - 2(183)(167.84)cos136[/math]

It yielded [math]A = 325.342[/math].

Regardless, I still think we can figure out the answer for X. But, I'm not exactly sure how. Maybe we just can't, because we need one more value. (i.e. angle).

According to my calculation, the answer is C.

First, I assume the corner angle to be 90 degrees. It has to be 90 degrees so in the small triangle, 44 + 90 = 134. That leaves 46 degrees for the other lone angle. To verify this theory, Add all the angles in the big triangle (21 + 23 + 46 + 90), thus it equals to 180.

Then, I find the length of X.

[math]sin44 = \frac{X}{167.84} = 116.5914609[/math]

Then to verify the length of X:

[math]c^{2} = a^{2} + b^{2}[/math]

[math]167.84^{2} = a^{2} + 116.5914609^{2}[/math]

[math]X = 120.7339921[/math]

As you see that the small triangle's angle is 90 and 44, the both length side-by-side 90 degrees should be almost the same. Because on a right angle triangle the 2 other degrees are 45 degrees. Thus, the opposite and adajecent sides to 45 degrees, are the same length. The point is, the small triangle should have its opposite and adajecent sides almost the same which is evidentally showed: 116.5914609 and 120.7339921.

To verify the lengths of the sides:

[math]c^{2} = a^{2} + b^{2}[/math]

[math]325.345^{2} - (183 + 120.7339921)^{2} = b^{2}[/math]

[math]=\sqrt{13,595.03107} = b[/math]

[math]X = 116.5977318[/math]

So my guess remains at C following my proofs.

(Now I need to go and do my own homework. )

Why are you still replying to this thread? The O.P. is permanently banned from SFN for some reason.

I suggest you to get a circle graphic paper and put dots where x=y, then you are creating a spiral. If you use Pythagorus Theorem, you are assuming that the lines are straight from a point to point. That's not true, because a spiral have NO straight lines. So you have to to use [math]2r\pi[/math] (circumstance), but again comes a problem: The spiral have NO circles. Hence, an idea just popped in my head: Use semi-circle. It's hard to explain, but, on a spiral you can divide a spiral into semi-circle segments and measure the curve side of the semi-circle, and add all the measurements for the whole length of the sprial.

Hope this helps.

Ok I looked up on http://www.dictionary.com for "arbitrary": "Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice.".

I don't really understand?

hey matt grime, why would I ask such a question? I have already search for defintions of those words, and I understand abit of what parameter is. I have done some works in my math class on that, but I have no concept of what an arbitrary is. Can you explain it, and give me an example?

Can anybody explain to me what is the difference between parameter and arbitrary?

Thanks for the clarification.

That's the problem: you can't do a perfect shuffle with 52 cards, it'll take like a million million of times to get the cards back in the original order.

Why?

[math]\frac{1-sinx}{1+sinx} = (secx - tanx)^2[/math]

The solution by solving the right side:

[math]=(\frac{1}{cosx} - \frac{sinx}{cosx})^2[/math]

[math]=\frac{1}{cos^{2}x} - 2\frac{sinx}{cosx} + \frac{sin^2{x}}{cos^{2}x}[/math] This is the question: How did I get to join all the [math]cos^{2}x[/math]? Because the middle one is only [math]cosx[/math]? Can anyone help me here?

[math]=\frac{1-2sinx+sin^{2}x}{cos^{2}x}[/math]

[math]=\frac{1-2sinx+sin^{2}x}{1-sin^{2}x}[/math]

[math]=\frac{(sinx-1)(sinx-1)}{(1-sinx)(1+sinx)}[/math]

[math]= \frac{1-sinx}{1+sinx}[/math]

Actually what I meant, was that the shirt might absorbs the EM radiation from the alarm clock and the shirt itself become radioactivity? Because after a lengthy of time, I smell the shirt, and it smelt like profuse of radiations on it. The smell actually made me feel sick.

I got an interesting idea. This morning when I was going to the bathroom, I was just thinking about my bedroom alarm clock. The alarm clock have LED (laser) numbers on the screen. Well, during the nights, I would put a shirt covering the clock, because the brightness of the light would bother me when I go to sleep. During the strolling to the bathroom, I was thinking if I leave the shirt there covering the alarm clock for a long period of time, (say 5 to 10 years?). Would the radiation of the LED lights make the shirt radioactive?

Nope. I cannot solve for "t" when I have no value for "k" on the hares' equation.

If the foxes' population to be 10% of the original population of hares of 1000, then the population of foxes to be 100.

[math]N_f = (0.1)(N_h)[/math]

[math]N_f = (0.1)(1000)[/math]

[math]N_f = 100[/math]

Then I put the 100 into the foxes' population forumla:

[math]100 = 74e^{0.08t}[/math]

[math]\frac{100}{74} = \frac{74e^{0.08t}}{74}[/math]

[math]ln1.351351351 = lne^{0.08t}[/math]

[math]ln1.351351351 = \frac{0.08tlne}{0.08lne}[/math]

[math]t = \frac{ln1.351351351}{0.08lne}[/math]

[math]t = 3.76381366[/math]

This answer to be 10% of hares' original population. If I am mistaken, please let me know. Thanks.

This is frustating. The [math]N_f[/math] seems to be missing the value for k. I don't know much the hares increase or decrease?? Or the foxes to be assumed 10% of the original amount of hares??

I know, but any suggestion of how to do that?

Yeah? I need to figure out how many years to get the population of foxes to be 10% of the population of hares. Do I put the 2 equations together and figure out the t? (t=years)

Hello guys. I was doing my math review in preparation for my Advanced Trigonometry exam, and I encountered this question with a difficulty.

When there were 1000 hares ([math]N_h = 1000e^{kt}[/math]), the number of foxes was increasing so that [math]N_f = 74e^{0.08t}[/math]. How many years will it take for the number of foxes to reach 10% of the number of hares?

I know I have to use the Natural logarithms to solve this question, but I'm not sure what I should do? If you guys can give me hints, that would be great, or I'll have to ask my teacher when I go back to school.

WHOOPS! I mistakely used the pythagorean theorem to find the surface area of a triangle! Stupid me. The formula to find the surface area for a triangle is [math]A=\frac{1}{2}bh[/math]. Therefore, [math]\frac{1}{2}4*3[/math] is 6. So the big crazy formula is correct.

I checked the formula by using c=5, b=3, a=4, but first, I used the [math]c^{2}=a^{2}+b^{2}[/math]. The surface area should be 5. Then I put in the variable with the known numbers, using this formula:[math]S_{triangle}=\frac{c\sqrt{b^2-\left(\frac{b^2-a^2+c^2}{2c}\right)^2}}{2}[/math]. I got a 6 for an answer following my calculation, so the formula would be right, if it have minus 1 like this: [math]S_{triangle}=\frac{c\sqrt{b^2-\left(\frac{b^2-a^2+c^2}{2c}\right)^2}}{2}-1[/math]. Therefore the answer would be 5, thus the surface area for a triangle with c=5, b=3, a=4.

Yeah I figured that I ought to use Natural logs, and I got a different isolation of t. I got [math]t = \frac{In2}{0.01In3}[/math]. How did you get the 100? I calculated Ducky Havok's method, and I got the same answer. Just to my curiousity, how do you know that the 100 will work?

I mildly disagree with jdurg for the misprint, because I know a popular case that was in 1991 (I think), and it was a legal act over an omit of printing. The famous Tim Hortons' case? You guys know anything about that? A male American was sipping a Tim Horton coffee and it [accidently] fell into his laps. The coffee was still really hot, and he decided to sue Tim Hortons company for 2 or 3 million of dollars. At that time, the coffee cups didn't have the warning comment, "It's very hot, please be careful". But I mildly agree with jdurg because the hot coffee caused an injury to the man or rather the public. But still, I think it was greedy of him to sue for million of dollars. He could in kindness warn Tim Horton's company in the protection of the people.