Is the red triangle at an acute angle or an obtuse angle to the black rectangle? Or am I confused on a fundamental level about how we can talk about angles?

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

skip to main |
skip to sidebar
## Old Salts

## Google+ers

Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

© Chaonosity Industries of Taiwan, Inc.

"Chaon", the Chaon logo, "Chewin", "Ninja Lesbians", the number forty-three (43), anything charcoal-colored, and all words beginning with the letter "K" are all strictly enforced trademarks of Chaonosity Industries. All rights reserved. Patents pending.

For more information on Chaon's privacy policies, consult with the Magical Spirit Guide. For questions or comments, drink a quart of Absinthe and we will contact you telepathically.

## 16 comments:

I don't see it being at any angle except 0 or 180.

word verification: dicapio

so close to Leonardo

I suck at this.

Try again: Is the top face of the red triangle at an acute or obtuse angle to the black rectangle?

Geometry was never my favorite subject but if my memory doesn't fail me, acute is less and obtuse is more than 90 and right is 90.

If I am correct, the question is wrongly formulated if we only consider the triangle which doesn't have obtuse angle, but a right and acute ones.

But if we include in the question the angles created by the triangle on the rectangle, yes, there is an obtuse angle too.

So we only have 2 choices (including or not the rectangle):

1 - right and acute angles

2 - right, acute and obtuse angles

According your position on the political spectrum (left or right) chicoms could only answer RIGHT :-) as they "always" are.

(the triangle's color is red... I know... it's easy)

For others... well...

Centrist will always offer 2 answers as usual.

Right wing will say: no doubt, obtuse, as they are always "right"

;-)

Since you are claiming the triangle, I'd say its at an acute angle.

Obviously the slanted line is at an acute angle on the left and an obtuse angle on the right, but since the body of the triangle is what we are discussing, it should be acute.

Red A

maybe? I mean,if this is for a patent, I'd ask an expert. I am sure there is a right answer for this.

Yeah, patent thing. And theoretically, I *am* the expert...

So, (forget the bad joke in my previous post) what is supposed to be the answer?

I still think that both angles (right, acute and obtuse) are there if we consider triangle WITH the rectangle.

I am just curious :-)

Beside, it seems it concerns a patent stuff.

So, does it concern the claim by itself OR a wrong expression from the candidate to the patent?

Maybe I should get some "fuel" from a breweries to think about it, before my train departure...

Depends on whether you are measuring clockwise from the black rectangle on the included angle of the red triangle, or counter-clockwise from the black rectange to the hypotenuse of the red triangle.

Robin,

Whatever, clockwise or counter-clockwise (nothing to do in geometry), still, we have the 3 kinds of angles...

Let's hear the "expert"

Is he busy with breweries subject?

Just kidding

:-)

I am curious too, as you.

I agree with Red A on this one. I see an acute red triangle sitting on top of a black rectangle.

If your goal is to describe the angle formed by the red triangle + black rectangle this is how I might word it:

"The acute red triangle sits on the black rectangle. When viewed together, these 2 shapes form an obtuse angle equal to 135 degrees."

Sorry I don't know if it fits what you need but an interesting challenge anyway. :)

-spencer

The red triangle has two obtuse angles in it. But itself is not at an angle.

-K

Thank you everyone for your input. I think the top face of the triangle is at both acute and obtuse angles to the top face of the rectangle. But I'm leaving the specification as it is, which uses acute. I found some other patents that used the same formulation, which means that this should not cause a:

"being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter"

rejection from the PTO. And if the patent issues, then it won't be a problem should we need to enforce it.

i believe that the triangle is acute. If it were obtuse the angle and/or height would be larger. Therefore, the red triangle against the black line is probably an optical illusion and is trying to trick you. The triangle is acute, final answer.

> A 8th grader

Hey Karl! I found you again. Send me an email... I'd like to catch up.

Triangles aren't acute or obtuse, only angles are. Pick one and it's easy. They don't have to be relative to any other object. It's and intrinsic property.

Your old pal,

Stephen

Sent an e-mail to your @uab.edu address, which is the only one I have.

I'm pretty sure you need to draw big oval eyes, a big oval nose and whiskers on it for it to be acute.

Post a Comment