 | | Re: What's with Brickbay
|
|
(...) standardized, (...) Well, yes and no. This is a big topic, FUT to off-topic.geek. A few random points (spoken as a big XML fan who nevertheless has some reality awareness) XML itself is a standard, true, but most implementations that use it (...) (24 years ago, 7-Aug-00, to lugnet.market.buy-sell-trade, lugnet.market.shopping, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) I'd say so :) Knowing that they're two verticies side by side helps! By my calculations I get: if length of a single side of the inscribed octagon is 10: Radius of the circle: 13.06562964876 Diameter of the circle: 26.13125929753 Circumference (...) (24 years ago, 3-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) D'oh! I should have specified that the two points are vertices of a single side of the octagon; I'm sure of that much! Am I on the right track here? Assuming that the side of the inscribed octagon is 10 units long, I'm calculating the (...) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) Nope... again, not unless you know something else (like how many verticies there are in between the two points). You could probably come up with a good guestimate, though, since there would only be 4 possible values for X, all of which you (...) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) I have the coordinates of the points, so am I correct in thinking I can calculate X? In any case, thanks to everyone for the help; I have what I need to figure it out! Dave! (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) Well... yes, I guess... assuming you knew X, though, you could easily calculate the diameter of the circle even without knowing the distance apart the two points were... Then the diameter of the circle would simply be: (...) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.geek, John Gramley writes: **snip of some rather helpful stuff** How about this: Suppose the two points are vertices of an inscribed octagon whose sides are each of length X. Would that help? Dave! (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) The process depends on whether you want a numerical process or a construction process. I'm going to assume that you want a numerical process and that you know the coordinates of the three points. If you want a construction process to be able (...) (24 years ago, 2-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
Anyway, I'm assuming you know BOTH the distance between the two points (D), AND the distance along the circumference (L)... I just did it again to be totally geeky, without assuming knowledge of x1,y1 and x2,y2: In the equasion: (...) (24 years ago, 1-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's looking at Euclid
|
|
(...) note (...) Well, I'm assuming that we know the coordinates of the two points-- in which case, you'll get slightly different results on the baseball and the basketball... Using the 1 inch string on the basketball will create two points which (...) (24 years ago, 1-Aug-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
