Re: strange....

"mina_world" <mina_world@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes in article <dqo9ok$h5a$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> dated Fri, 20 Jan 2006 00:03:51 +0900:
>
>"Joseph Fagan" <noemailplease@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>news:dqo8dm$93r$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> "mina_world" <mina_world@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:dqo5rf$fve$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > hello.....doctor~
>> >
>> > http://board-2.blueweb.co.kr/user/math565/data/math/tri.jpg
>> >
>> > i can't find the error.
>> >
>> > i need your wisdom.
>> > thank you very much for your advice.
>> >
>> >
>> I think the bug is in the first line..."I know the fact that BF:FE = 3:1"
>> How do you know this?
>> Based on your own work which looks good to me, it's closer to 3.0972 : 1
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>
>i think........
>
>http://board-2.blueweb.co.kr/user/math565/data/math/tri3-1.jpg
>
>how do you think about it ?

I think you're right about BF:FE.

I don't see why BF = 2/3 though. That would make angles BFD=BDF=80 degrees,
in other words BE and AD would be angle trisectors as well as base
trisectors.

--Keith Lewis klewis {at} mitre.org
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
.

Quantcast