# October: 231 & 232

Name Message
Kate
Posts: 9

Joined: 11/6/2008
 October: 231 & 232 Flag »  Reply » View the problems here: http://www.profsurv.com/problemcorner.aspx, then come back to discuss.
Monday, October 03, 2011 at 10:23:57 AM
John Nolton
Posts: 15

Joined: 10/11/2011
 Re: October: 231 & 232 Flag »  Reply » I would like to make some comments on problem # 231. What caught my eye on this problem was the statement by Dr. Bloch; "This is a problem known to be difficult". This might be somewhat true if Dr. Bloch had asked for a strictly GEOMETRICAL SOLUTION as the original problem did. This he did not do. By his last statement in the problem "Without drawing any additional lines, solve for angle X" ( which is angle DEA in his drawing) makes the problem very easy and should not take more than 5 minutes to solve. What I would like to do for all that look at the problem corner is purpose another similar problem here and see how many readers can solve it using elementary geometry (no trigonometry or any other higher math). I will post the answer here in 2 weeks + or -. Using Dr. Bloch labeling of the angles in the isosceles triangle (see his problem # 231); angle ACB = 20 degree , angle EAB = 60 degree , angle ABD = 30 degree, Solve for angle DEA  using only elementary geometry. Dr. Bloch's solution is long and you do not need three simultaneous equations to solve it. Another problem with his numerical solution is he list "tan x = 0.364, and x = 20 degrees". The inverse tangent of 0.364 is 20d 00m 05.4+ seconds not 20 degree's exactly as he showed.  Respectfully John Nolton Tombstone, AZ
Sunday, October 16, 2011 at 5:28:50 PM
Benjamin.Bloch
Posts: 1

Joined: 4/24/2009
 Re: October Problem 231 Flag »  Reply » Problem 231 did not give any numerical lengths specifically because a general solution was required.I apologize if my intent was not made clearer. Thank you for your kind support,Dr. Benjamin Bloch
Tuesday, October 18, 2011 at 7:51:34 PM
John Nolton
Posts: 15

Joined: 10/11/2011
 Re: October: 231 & 232 Flag »  Reply » Dr. Bloch you do not need any length to solve the problem. It is quite clear you did not read my post. Your solution is long and your listed value of tan x= 0.364 is also incorrect. You have turned a simple GEOMETRIC PROOF into a numerical one. Hopping for a better solution from you. John Nolton Tombstone, AZ
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 at 11:01:16 AM
John Nolton
Posts: 15

Joined: 10/11/2011