/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9640702
apparently not

Don't need calculus ass clown it's basic, basic geometry.

infinitely long rope ladder

>>9640756
Then do it
shouldn't take more than a minute if its basic geometry, am i rite?

>>9640761
Don't feel like doing it. Not my job to educate you.

>>9640759
kek

>>9640762
So you're a brainlet, got it

I thought this was it but then I realized it's just an upper bound

>>9640702
dist from 0 to R times 2

9.582298953840144... meters

>>9640844
wrong.

>>9640767
I could solve it right fucking now if I wanted to WITHOUT calculus. Push me one more time you little fuckign pussy.

Here you go!

>>9640860
half marks for doing the work, but not answering the question

>>9640859
do it faggot, I really wanna see you try and fail. you literally cant solve this without calculus

>>9640862
What are you missing?

>>9640702
do your own homework little buddy

>>9640867
p = 2
q = 5

>>9640870
>widely recognizable problem
>solution available on internet
at least you're not the faggot who claims he could solve it without using calculus

R = 9.58

>>9640872
eh

Round about 9.58229895384014400284931483399668003823314636234817359995010006989448896499711338400133740172757555516623402191078057903021766062678518058471863476659069950290604901209817562411656018889713041193283824220700357601532097485743553221619536089706622377034334336236329459278399563571390559654049146002812403955692258028856520749861628918811420195983783187468015704673092739682170429829915513013949097056839257590323386565244103636590720187425790631556519126692932037500833903389463381623846363302644403240711208291652583423485490781026790241233596565500913823687315028805240139804241455622316607499375505122166354245508113147044780219400181397689075675444413986265453030415063363577799145898840919901863998990897818205255591734069879114208023468435067812887707937500819860882953281391803276943890667163135084471775897835747572613281524767426201917628334627377351620881379156993317715136755713715987004403079292571106280791906153991475370150653509999016427916868306474619148985424020890438678742453188760635465119618586504328606244831145658513347441043431634828347884934810352520867898623306110558168181524013542637183449652373912187937266434727134924754715419021363394234203336670934959122650959311848797190121328248962900691811437917055431608322086434938080303311873070298090652927660997984411381657755252490449181109434095782192625450624979173209907804963766164669978361298669613355867344619583970012312935377738657353307043951054433118408105480722884294700790292389076262337378754348109346557638414129831996760732082187498164551899464136903427395152123356924076659073616321551882702337562892750079843084818487602226659063217126523962676609438456332038295142314547685030963027420250341176112769672373666469431119207768779038262166057186973899774213223825995440883417305446045403467126752283778746958027571903193220893813954645392946444940853064448785542259342878254185820591847208465675870601896573138596273969206051900874411312919336964366587895700308511391567577787990831839404629335440

>>9640846
>>9640877
>>9640881
>what is an exact solution

>>9640892
[math](5^{frac{2}{3}} + 2^{frac{2/3}})^{frac{3/2}} [/math]

>>9640892
(You)

>>9640892
not what the OP asked for
but just for you:
[math] (2^\frac{w}{3} + 5^\frac{w}{3})^\frac{3}{2} [/math]
where w is a proprietary mystery number that you will need to pay for, or read the thread for

>>9640901
embarassing

>>9640911
an exact solution implies no meme exponents like 2/3

>>9640860
how did you get your first eqn?

>>9640953
We want a linear function y and we know y(0) = y_0 and y(p)=q. That's enough to find the coefficients.

>>9640958
nice

If you assume the ladder is moving at relativistic speeds compared to the corner frame, then you can fit an arbitrary length.

>>9640967
sftu u

>>9640702
Depends, does the corner have a ceiling?

>>9640702
depends on how thick the ladder is

>>9640860
>tfw you got it in a much quicker and cleaner way.

>>9640702
>OP's homework is very obvious and clear
>all these wannabe smartasses asking these stupid questions

r=2,5
AB=a^2+b^2
b=10/(a-2)+5
put into solver
pick the solution that fits the correct range of possible solutions
>a = 2 + 2^(1/3) 5^(2/3)
now b = 5 + 2^(2/3) 5^(1/3)

ez pz

>>9641232
of course AB needs a sqrt. and a numerical approximation for the solution is 9.5823

>>9640866
>you literally cant solve this without calculus
you can it's just a lot fucking harder

>>9641232

>>9641243
I had a thought - a matrix or something might do it...

>>9641232
>set up equations
>put into solver / ???
>profit

do have the gist?

>>9641257
pretty sure if you did that you'd just end up saving differentiation until the end, but you'd still have to do it

>>9641258
>he doesnt know how to look for extrema in a simple function
just set the derivative to zero dumbass

>>9641430
btw I solved it with wolframalpha, inserted function d/da a^2+b^2 = 0 where b=10/(a-2)+5, thats how you solve it

>>9641436
I might be old school, but if you used a "solver", you didnt solve shit. The written solution above is the proper way.

>>9641447
if you manually do basic calculations you are just a retard

the intelligent part is to find how to solve something, not to do trivial but time consuming calculations

>This fucking thread

Stop giving legit answers to obvious bait or highschool homework and tell them to fuck off instead

>>9641470
setting up those equations is not trivial.

>>9640702
sqrt( (2p)^2 + (2q)^2 )

>>9641470
people who can solve that without spending 1000s (did you just use the free website?) on software are still superior imo

>>9641482
what do you mean? I set up the equation that I put in wolframalpha very easily

>>9641492
do you realize how stupid you sound? you are basically anti automation. why live in the industrialized age when you can still do everything manually? why transport goods in trucks and not carry them in your hands? why use machines in factories to produce smartphones when you can "just use your hands"? because automation is more precise and more efficient

manually solving trivial math problems that require time consuming calculations is akin to planting cotton in your garden and making your own clothes with it. it may look impressive to the stupid but in reality its a retarded waste of time

>>9641492
ohh and yes I just used the free website of course but I got the app with full functionality for not even 1 buck

Never seen this type of problem before. It was fun to solve. Solution R=9.58229854.

>>9640761
>Then do it
no U

>>9640702
Fuuuuuck I remember having an extremely similar problem to solve in high school. Was annoying as all hell. I'm getting ptsd just thinking about it.

>>9640702
how high is the room? you can hold the ladder upwards and walk trough the corner.

>>9640923
the quantity i gave you is irreducible, imbecile

>>9642058
yes it is brainlet

>9642066
do not reply to me again

>>9640702
I would call you a retard for not being able to do your own homework, but at least you figured out a way to make /sci/ do it for you

>>9640967
I lost. Thanks Anon.

>>9640702
infinite for a<p or b<q

What's the solution for 3 or n dimensions? How do you even define a corner in n dimensions?

General solution for some p and q in 2d would be:

(p^(1/3)*q^(1/3)+p)*sqrt(1+q^(2/3)/p^(2/3))

For p=2, q=5 this is 9.58... metres.

General solution for some p and q in 2d would be:

(p^(1/3)*q^(2/3)+p)*sqrt(1+q^(2/3)/p^(2/3))

For p=2, q=5 this is 9.582298954... metres.

>>9640702

ladders on my thread
calculate

>>>/bant/4671028

I am a brainlet. Can anyone explain to me why the answer isn't sqrt(7^2 + 7^2) ~= 9.899494937

>>9645600
Obviously wrong. If [math]f(p,q)[/math] is the general solution in terms of [math]p[/math] and [math]q[/math] then by symmetry and scaling we have
[math]f(p,q) = f(q,p)[/math]
[math]f(cp, cq) = c \cdot f(p,q)[/math] for all [math]c \in \mathbb{R}[/math]

>>9640702
m=(-q/p)^(1/3) is the slope of the line y=mx+B where

q = mp + B