You are not logged in.
Suppose I have a pipe that is bent to a degree, measuring the length of the pipe from the top to the bottom at 11.76cm. I want to know the length of the pipe as if there was no bend ?
I need to re-open this subject as I feel Ill understand better.
If I have an object that is 12 inches high, and 4 inches wide, and 24 inches deep, can this be converted to a scale ratio ? And if so, how can I be reversed back from a scale ratio to the imperial dimensions ?
Ah ok I understand
I had the MS Calculator set to standard not scientific, when I changed to scientific I got the correct percentage number.
How come you multiple the number again;
2345 - .45 x /2345/ ?
The dot between the .45 and the 2345 means multiply. It can also be written,
Doing the above math always gives me 5497969.75 not 1289.75
In your example;
2345 - .45 what is that multiplication symbol after that, all I see is a dot ?
You can't subtract 45% from 2345, you can subtract 45% of something from 2345, show me an example !
2345 - 45% = 1289
I don't understand what you meant
>>>That was just for convenience. If I were speaking that I would say about 45%. But in a calculation if you use a number that you say is about this then the answer is rounded also. That is why you are getting 1266.3 not 1278.
2345 - 54% = 1266
A little off from 1278, but close.
I'm rounding as you said, when you round it's 54 !
You get .5449893390191898. So you would need a 54.49893390191898% reduction.
That is where I'm getting the 54 !
I never said that was the correct answer you gave me ! <sigh>
I wanted to know where you got the decimal .54 from ?
2345-2345 obviously gives you 0 yet you say it gives 1067 ?
If I subtract 1278 from 2345 I get 1067
1278 / 2345 = .54
Are you saying that if you wanted to pay only $1278 from the original price of $2345 that would be a .54 or 54% cut ?
If you subtract 54% from 2345 you get 1266.3 not 1278 ?
.54% that is a decimal, hrmm
If I told you $2345 and you told me you only wanted to pay $1067 how much percentage would you want off, would that be the same as what you mentioned 45.5% ?
How do I calculate the percentage, one number taken away from another number; here is an example:
2345-1278 = 1067
What would be the percentage ?
Now I get;
0.8276.............
Correct, found the key
Windows8 calculator is not the same.
Why did you use square root?
if you have a calculator then enter .9176 press y^x key and then press 2.2
Where is this on the Windows Calculator ?
I did square root on the calculator It isn't yRoot on the calculator ?
I got 0.84198976
It's for a math problem, is there a calculator function that can do this ?
bobby can this be simplified, without the long equation ?
How do I raise this number 0.9176 to the power of 2.2 ?
I have to always divide the smallest number of a larger ratio into the bigger number ? If so I'm always going to get a decimal.
Firstly it does not really matter if you get a decimal and second you do not necessarily have to be concerned about whether the
number/ratio you are trying to transform is smaller or larger.On the other hand whole numbers are nice to work with and it may be easier to try to get a result which only has whole numbered
components. In this case you are scaling the thing down as I understand it so there is perhaps a greater chance of ending up with
a number which requires digits after the decimal point. (It is a fact of life that numbers requiring a decimal point are more common.)Here is an example of a ratio conversion that converts a higher set of numbers to a lower set with whole numbers only:
3 : 6 : 9 is the same as 1 : 2 : 3 (here I have divided each element of the ratio by 3 I could have multiplied by one third)
(obviously that example does not have the same ratio as your problem)
If the second ratio contained only two elements and I wanted to find the third then it can only be done if the two I have given are
in the correct ratio. If I chose 4 : 7 : ? then that would not be possible for 3 : 6 : 9 however if I change the 7 to an 8 then we get
4 : 8 : 12In your example in the earlier post the problem is that the two numbers you gave for the new ratio are already incorrect relative
to each other. In other words one must be changed. Either the original measurements are wrong or the two numbers in the
second ratio are not in the right ratio relative to each other. The fact that the second number is larger than the first, but the other
way round in the other ratio immediately alerts a mathematician to an inconsistent proportion.If I have the ratio 3 : 6 : 9 and I want a model to be 1 : 7 : ??? then the first number has to go from 3 to 1, but the second has
to go from 6 to 7, with the same multiplication. Well this is not going to work because 3 multiplied by a third equals 1
but if I do the same multiplication to the second number 6 get transformed to 2. One cannot go up and the other down.
In fact the two numbers that we give for the second ratio have to be in the correct ratio of the first two numbers of the first ratio.
It would probably by a good idea to look at Bob's post including the image file he posted (if you haven't already done so).
Trying to explain this using plain text only is not easy and could cause confusion.Anyway I hope that has cleared the matter up rather than muddied the waters even further.
Whoa, I feel like your shooting my head. Can you break it down with my original book example, I may get the math more easier ?
When you are converting a ratio by scaling it up or down you have to multiply or divide the components by the same number.
It is not possible to put the ratio 27 : 24 : 7 into the form 7 : 9 : ?
This can be proven by first calculating the number you would have to use to multiply 27 by something to get to 7 and then
testing whether the same number can be multiplied by 24 to get 9The number (7/27) = 0.259259...... (recurring decimal) can be multiplied by 27 to get 7
but if we multiply this by 24 it results in 6.2222222 (but 9 was needed)
I did wonder whether the 7 and the 9 were the wrong way round. This does not work either, but is closer.
(27 divided by 3 gets 9 but 24 divided by 3 gives us 8 rather than 7)
If you consider the 7 bit to be right but do not know the other two numbers then you can do the scaling down but you
get something like this: 7 : 6.222222... : 1.8148148....Or if it were 9 as the initial number you might get: 9 : 8 : 2.3333....
or if the second component of the second ratio 9 were correct we get: 10.125 : 9 : 2.625
(That assumes that the ratio 27 : 24 : 7 is correct )
I have to always divide the smallest number of a larger ratio into the bigger number ? If so I'm always going to get a decimal.