We're the anti-meme community where the joke is that there isn't one, and by explaining that, we've ruined the whole thing, but we all find the collective misery hilarious.
The music of comedy is more important than the joke itself.
Follow the instance rules please, this is a lovely instance.
That one is quite simple. On the sketch, you get
w+x+y+z=360º
Making the substitution with x+y=w+z, you get
w+w+z+z=360º <=> 2(w+z)=360º <=> w+z=180º
Proving AOB is a line, because the sketch provides, that w+z is an angle of AOB.
I am pretty sure, you were not asking for the proof, but I wanted to do it anyways. Does a genuine proof count as an anti meme?
Now you're thinking with angles!
Wait but you can't just sub x+y with w+z. (Its given, my brain forgot about it)
I mean, could have specified that at the start
how do you know that x+y=w+z? isn't that already assuming that they are equal? what if they're one degree off?
As the teacher would tell you: read the entire problem before answering! (It says so in the problem)
dammit nothing changes 😂
Because we read the question: if x+y=w+z, prove...
isn't that already assuming that they are equal?
The problem asks us to make this assumption.
But how do you know it's 360? If it wasnt a line, it could be 359.999 Or lets say 350, then w+z is 175.
The 360-ness you take is from the point of view where you already expect it to be a line.
Because all the angles surrounding a point always add up to 360
You can also say that since ABC and D are all equally distant from O, so they all fall exactly on a circle with O as the center point.
It's a trick question. Question didn't say whether AOB is a straight line or a gay one
The line on the other side, the trans-line.
x + y + z + w = 360 because... Uh. I don't remember what the terms to use are but it does. It's a full circle. It's 4 points and 4 angles.
2 (x + y) = 360 because substitute x + y = z + w
x + y = 180 because you divide each side by 2
because x + y is 180, AOB is a line.
That's the best I can do. I may have forgotten a few steps about things you can't assume.
Maybe thee is an elegant way but
X+y+w+z=360°
Given X+y=w+z
Therefore we can sub X+y with w+z
(W+z)+(w+z)=360°
2(W+z)=360°
Divide both sides by 2
W+z=360°/2
W+z=180°
Straight lines are defined as having/being 180 angle
Oh i forgot about x+y being given as w+z. Yep with that its all good. I thought you made that assumption.
The elegant way would be to use radians over degrees
You have to show your work in snokenkeekaguard's class
Wdym?
Pleased to see everyone solving the math problem in the antimeme, I did too!
Theres something about these little questions thats irresistible to solve lol. I just wish it was a tougher task.
Did you not learn anything from your high school that's easy🥲
I did, but after 22 years I forgot how to solve algebra without being given at least 1 of the variables. 🥺
But also I still dont know how I would prove it's a line even if I got the x+y=w+z part. I could say 1+2=1+2. So 3. How is 3 a line? I have no idea. 3 is a number not a line. 😩
Unless... 3 is a squiggly line? 🤔
Edit: Bit disappointed nobody came to shit all over my math skills. Especially since halfway through typing the comment, I forgot the second half of the problem. 🤣
You do have a number, it's just not written down! It's that a full circle is 360 degrees
The actual maths is really easy, the bit that I assume is tripping you up is the realisation that you have more information than the words of the question
Just intuitively, it says they're equal, and the paired angles are adjacent. The only time two halves of a full circle have equal angles is half way.
I think this question is about making sure you state thinks in a formal manner. It is obvious, but you need to do state that as a mathematical proof.
As long you leave no ambiguities about your reasoning, it’s a mathematical proof.
You guys are all creative/smart. I would have held my ruler against the line and then traced around it with my pencil.
Better stick to ExTeenTailism