The anwser is none of them, they'l kill each other before they reach the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
Printable View
The anwser is none of them, they'l kill each other before they reach the line.Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
Nope, DICE fixed that traded kill bug now. (and broke a batch of other things)Quote:
Originally Posted by RussianElite.
1. Seriously? You can fit only 370 ball bearings in a space of 10cm X 10cm x 5 cm, with each ball bearing having a 1cm diametre? That is not even close. Let me help you out, assume yuo just pack each layer 10x10 ball bearings, that is a 100 ball bearings per layer. Now, you can pack 5 of them on top of each other, that means the answer is at least 500, but since they are spheres, you could easily fit in more.Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
2. At least the power connectors are protected from some foreign debris. However, since dust is made up predominately of dead skin or skin that is shed, I would say that given the condition of said pc, you may want to cut down on your porn collection. Now, please put in a little bit more effort into answering the questions please.
3.1. No.
3.2. No.
3.3. No.
3.4. No.
sorry, but thusfar still no vote from me.
1. Guess that's what happens when answering questions while trying to work :P I forgot the last step. 370,2402448465 / ((4/3) x pi x r^3) = 707,1067811865. 707 bearings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skouperd
Nope still not... let me help you out again...Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
1. If you start your bottom layer with 10 x 10 then that gives you 100 ball bearings.
2. if you stack your second layer 9 x 9 (81 bearings) with each ball bearing sitting in the lowest point between the botton 4 ball bearings, the height of the second row will only be 1.541196 cm.
3. The third layer you again pack 10x10, but then that layer is 2.082392cm in height.
4. continue with this pattern, 100 then 81, then 100, then 81 until the container is full then you get at least 724 ball bearings in which is greater than the 707 you mentioned.
5. A word of advise, this ain't no simple puzzle and you need to apply some brain power to it as Google will not give you the correct answer.
If you stack the second layer as 9x9, you won't be using all of the available space, surely you'd have to take one sphere off both sides and pack 8x8 to be optimal?Quote:
Originally Posted by Skouperd
How do you get the height of 1.541196cm given the 9x9 packing? I tried finding a method to work that out (without diving into all kinds of trig that I haven't touched since school) and went for an easier option instead.
Ignore me, it clicked. Still curious about the 1.54 answer though.Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
You will work it out, eventually, just a comment, you don't even need trig to do it. Just think a little bit 3 dimensional and use who I deem one of the founding fathers of mathematical theoroms' most famous theorom of it all.Quote:
Originally Posted by kmckelvin
Kmckelvin you actually shouldnt try answer skouperds questions. Just Nod and wave.. as i said.Attachment 544
and like I said, you will need to please show your calculations as we have some members in grrr, names will not be mentioned, who are not always the sharpest tools in the sheds...Quote:
Originally Posted by TygerBS