Best Answer BMAD, 30 March 2014 - 02:36 PM

Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum. Like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process. To be a part of BrainDen Forums you may create a new account or sign in if you already have an account. As a member you could start new topics, reply to others, subscribe to topics/forums to get automatic updates, get your own profile and make new friends. Of course, you can also enjoy our collection of amazing optical illusions and cool math games. If you like our site, you may support us by simply clicking Google "+1" or Facebook "Like" buttons at the top. If you have a website, we would appreciate a little link to BrainDen. Thanks and enjoy the Den :-) |

Guest Message by DevFuse

Started by bonanova, Mar 16 2014 06:13 AM

Best Answer BMAD, 30 March 2014 - 02:36 PM

Spoiler for I should have considered two fixed points

Go to the full post
24 replies to this topic

Posted 01 April 2014 - 12:03 AM

are we assuming a regular pentagon?

Posted 01 April 2014 - 03:35 AM

Yes. Basically I'm wondering whether the number of sides of the containing (regular) polygon matters.

I'm working on it, don't have the answer yet.

*Vidi vici veni.*

Posted 01 April 2014 - 04:42 AM

it would seem that the answer is that it matters since a pentagon can't easily be divided into four identical pieces.

Posted 01 April 2014 - 04:12 PM

Spoiler for > too

Posted 01 April 2014 - 07:21 PM

Spoiler for > too

I think for triangles with vertices either inside or on a circle the quadrant analysis

applies and the result is the same. The only insight needed is to see that a line

connecting points in opposite quadrants can be on either side of center with equal likelihood.

I'm going to run simulations for other polygons (an equilateral-triangle containing

shape seems interesting for starters) to see whether the result holds in every case.

I started by dividing it into sixths and inspecting the pairs of opposing sixths.

It certainly holds for a square container.

*Vidi vici veni.*

Posted 01 April 2014 - 07:24 PM

I think polygons are different because they are not equal distance to the center. Which is important in my approach and really matters in the forming of possible triangles across the center

Posted 01 April 2014 - 07:36 PM

Possibly true so long as they do not have 4-fold rotational symmetry.

I should have the triangle container simulated soon.

*Vidi vici veni.*

Posted 01 April 2014 - 10:14 PM

Probably only shapes that can be properly circumscribed

Posted 02 April 2014 - 08:47 AM

Spoiler for Results for triangle

*Vidi vici veni.*

Posted 03 April 2014 - 06:17 AM

A general case could in principle be solvable with an integral, but in practice it would be so messy that simulation would still be more feasible.

Spoiler for

Edit: It's actually more complicated than that hideous monstrosity... I left out that you would need to normalize the probabilities to sum to 1 instead of using raw squares of distances from the center.
**Edited by plasmid, 03 April 2014 - 07:16 AM.**

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users