MHB Circles in a square and diameter of the circle

AI Thread Summary
The problem involves a larger circle inscribed in a square with sides measuring 40 units. A smaller circle, tangent to the larger circle and two sides of the square, is placed in one corner of the square. The challenge is to determine the diameter of this smaller circle. The solution requires understanding the geometric relationships between the circles and the square. The problem highlights the complexity of seemingly simple geometric configurations.
Wilmer
Messages
303
Reaction score
0
A circle is inscribed in a square with sides = 40.

A smaller (of course!) circle tangent to the above
circle and 2 sides of the square is inscribed in
one of the corners of the square.

What is the diameter of this circle?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
$20(\sqrt2-1)$, easy.
 
No.
diameter = 40(3-2√2) = ~6.86
Not as easy as it appears...
 
You’re right. I overlooked the teeny bit in the extreme corner.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top