Re: Length and area..
- From: "[Mr.] Lynn Kurtz" <kurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 22:26:11 GMT
On Sat, 05 Apr 2008 19:43:10 GMT, "[Mr.] Lynn Kurtz"
<kurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2, 0. Your second figure doesn't enclose any area unless I
misinterpret the meaning of the dotted lines.
--Lynn
In addition, if you mean the area under discussion to be enclosed by
the three solid lines and the dotted line, so that it is a rectangular
region with one boundary missing, it would be much clearer to
cross-hatch or shade the area. Your picture is confusing because you
have other dotted lines that don't have that meaning and no shading to
indicate the area. If that is the area you meant to convey, then the
answer would be 2.
--Lynn
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Length and area..
- From: jonas . thornvall
- Re: Length and area..
- References:
- Length and area..
- From: mina_world
- Re: Length and area..
- From: [Mr.] Lynn Kurtz
- Re: Length and area..
- From: mina_world
- Re: Length and area..
- From: [Mr.] Lynn Kurtz
- Length and area..
- Prev by Date: Re: Line does not consist of points..
- Next by Date: Re: Combinatorics question
- Previous by thread: Re: Length and area..
- Next by thread: Re: Length and area..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|