AppleNova Forums

Yochanan · 2005-12-19, 13:27

Well I thought it was fun, maybe I should just refer to it as a relatively fun math problem I made up. Here goes:

The 4:3 TV I have outside is a 27". I'm going to replace it with a 16:9 TV. What size 16:9 TV would I need to buy that would have the same height as my 4:3 TV?

Good Luck.

EDIT: Quick edit. Post questions for any clarifications you might need.

curiousuburb · 2005-12-19, 13:37

Are you including the bezel in that calculation, or purely the picture tube measured on the diagonal?

Is the bezel uniform size all the way around the tube? (many are deeper on the bottom to accomodate controls)

Kickaha · 2005-12-19, 13:47

height of current tube = x

27^2 = x^2 + (3/4x)^2
27^2 = (25/16)x^2
x = sqrt(27^2 * (16/25))

now plug that in for the other ratio:

Z^2 = x^2 + (9/16x)^2
Z = sqrt((26^2 * 16/25) + (9/16(27^2 * (16/25)))^2)

simple

alcimedes · 2005-12-19, 14:18

bassplayinMacFiend · 2005-12-19, 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Kickaha

height of current tube = x

27^2 = x^2 + (3/4x)^2
27^2 = (25/16)x^2
x = sqrt(27^2 * (16/25))

now plug that in for the other ratio:

Z^2 = x^2 + (9/16x)^2
Z = sqrt((26^2 * 16/25) + (9/16(27^2 * (16/25)))^2)

simple

The answer to your first equation, 21.6 makes sense, but the answer to your second equation, 263.262974, doesn't seem to make sense.

bassplayinMacFiend · 2005-12-19, 15:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by alcimedes

42"

You must've read my mind (or HHGTTG) because I replaced my 27" 4:3 CRT with a 42" 16:9 DLP.

BenP · 2005-12-19, 15:57

Huh...I got 33".

Edit: I assumed the height was 3/4 of the width...is it the other way around?

Never mind. Funny, alcimedes. Real funny.

Bryson · 2005-12-19, 16:28

From non-mathematical means, I can say that the 32" widescreen TV we bought at work looked the same height as the 27" 4:3 TV it replaced.

Which is pretty much what you wanted to know, right?

EmC · 2005-12-19, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by bassplayinMacFiend

The answer to your first equation, 21.6 makes sense, but the answer to your second equation, 263.262974, doesn't seem to make sense.

21.6 is the the width of the 4:3 TV not the height.

The answer is a 33" display.

Math

Bryson · 2005-12-19, 16:39

Except most manufacturers make TVs in 28", 32", 36" and 42" screens. (Well, and 50", and even 70".) So 32" is the closest TV you can buy.

EmC · 2005-12-19, 16:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryson

Except most manufacturers make TVs in 28", 32", 36" and 42" screens. (Well, and 50", and even 70".) So 32" is the closest TV you can buy.

Right, 32" is probably the closest you are going to get. The answer to the math problem is still 33".

Yochanan · 2005-12-19, 17:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by curiousuburb

Are you including the bezel in that calculation, or purely the picture tube measured on the diagonal?

Is the bezel uniform size all the way around the tube? (many are deeper on the bottom to accomodate controls)

We're only working with screen sizes here. Advertisers generally just call a TV a 27" no matter the bezel or bottom lip.

Yochanan · 2005-12-19, 17:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Kickaha

height of current tube = x

27^2 = x^2 + (3/4x)^2
27^2 = (25/16)x^2
x = sqrt(27^2 * (16/25))

now plug that in for the other ratio:

Z^2 = x^2 + (9/16x)^2
Z = sqrt((26^2 * 16/25) + (9/16(27^2 * (16/25)))^2)

simple

I'm not bringing that to the store

What were your measurements for the height and width of the 4:3 TV? The height and width of the 16:9 TV?

I'm not so good anymore at following math equations like that (been out of school a while). How did you get the number 25 involved in any part of the equation?

Yochanan · 2005-12-19, 17:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by alcimedes

42"

Don't panic, but that's not what I got for an answer. But I'm not very good at this stuff anyway.

Yochanan · 2005-12-19, 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenP

Huh...I got 33".

Edit: I assumed the height was 3/4 of the width...is it the other way around?

Never mind. Funny, alcimedes. Real funny.

The height is 3/4 of the width.

Bryson · 2005-12-19, 17:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yochanan

Don't panic, but that's not what I got for an answer. But I'm not very good at this stuff anyway.

I think that was a Hitchhikers Guide reference, not an actual answer.

Kickaha · 2005-12-19, 17:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yochanan

I'm not bringing that to the store

What were your measurements for the height and width of the 4:3 TV? The height and width of the 16:9 TV?

First set solved for height of 27", second set plugged it into solving for diag of 16:9 ratio. Supposedly. See below.

Quote:

I'm not so good anymore at following math equations like that (been out of school a while). How did you get the number 25 involved in any part of the equation?

Because I did it too fast and squared 5 instead of 3.

Also, I think I solved for same width, not same height. What can I say, it was off the top of my head.

thuh Freak · 2005-12-19, 17:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryson

I think that was a Hitchhikers Guide reference, not an actual answer.

Don't Panic

alcimedes · 2005-12-19, 20:11

Correct. On all counts.

RowdyScot · 2005-12-19, 23:04

This thread just made my day

Brad · 2005-12-19, 23:28

I guess they're not teaching the Pythagorean theorem to kids these days any more, eh?

scratt · 2005-12-19, 23:32

You could always measure your current tv height and then when in the shop find one with the same height using the same tape measure....

billybobsky · 2005-12-20, 00:17

Why would you need to use the same tape measure?

I thought we standardized these things for a reason...

scratt · 2005-12-20, 01:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by billybobsky

Why would you need to use the same tape measure?

I thought we standardized these things for a reason...

To prevent user error... Using familiar tools leads to less errors when using them. i.e. Reading inches instead of cms etc.

In case there was a problem at the factory and the particular tape you used had been made incorrectly. As long as you are using the same one it will give you the same length reading even if it is incorrect.

Pedantic I know.. But then that's the hell I live in!

bassplayinMacFiend · 2005-12-20, 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

I guess they're not teaching the Pythagorean theorem to kids these days any more, eh?

You mean that whole distance = sqrt (x^2 + y^2), or c^2 (hypotenuse) = a^2 + b^2?

bassplayinMacFiend · 2005-12-20, 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

I guess they're not teaching the Pythagorean theorem to kids these days any more, eh?

You mean that whole distance = sqrt (x^2 + y^2), or c^2 (hypotenuse) = a^2 + b^2?

Brad · 2005-12-20, 20:00

Yup. Along with some basic substitution, that's all you need to solve the problem.

shell · 2005-12-20, 23:33

Actually, considering the bezel your best bet is just sticking with the tape measure idea. Either that or "eyeball" it.

bassplayinMacFiend · 2005-12-22, 08:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brad

Yup. Along with some basic substitution, that's all you need to solve the problem.

Pythagorus was the shizzle yo.

Windswept · 2005-12-23, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dr. Kickaha

height of current tube = x

27^2 = x^2 + (3/4x)^2
27^2 = (25/16)x^2
x = sqrt(27^2 * (16/25))

now plug that in for the other ratio:

Z^2 = x^2 + (9/16x)^2
Z = sqrt((26^2 * 16/25) + (9/16(27^2 * (16/25)))^2)

simple

Okay, here's the way a *liberal arts major* does things (

) haha :

I press myself against the screen at home and see that the length is from shoulder to fingertips and the height is from elbow to fingertips.

Then when, one day, I happen to be at the store, without a tape measure and without written-down measurements handy, I *always* have my shoulder, elbow and fingertips conveniently available to get a general idea of the new equipment I need.

Of course when I was shopping for a side-by-side refrigerator when my house was new, I took the most minute and exact measurements, because the space available was tight.

Even with my extreme care in measuring, the builder ended up making the space smaller than originally specified, and to accommodate the refrigerator I had picked, a carpenter had to come out and shorten the countertop so the fridge would fit. *sigh*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
iMac G5 shutdown during sleep problem w/open firmware	kellte2	Genius Bar	7	2005-11-01 21:21
airport express problem problem problem	moo	Genius Bar	8	2005-10-08 19:12
Transmission Problem?	ast3r3x	AppleOutsider	18	2005-04-28 11:36
Question about IBook problem and Applecare	mdeloria	Genius Bar	6	2005-03-23 17:27
Serious problem, Help or advice needed.	stevegong	Genius Bar	20	2004-07-27 21:04

Yochanan Member Join Date: May 2005	2005-12-19, 13:27 Well I thought it was fun, maybe I should just refer to it as a relatively fun math problem I made up. Here goes: The 4:3 TV I have outside is a 27". I'm going to replace it with a 16:9 TV. What size 16:9 TV would I need to buy that would have the same height as my 4:3 TV? Good Luck. EDIT: Quick edit. Post questions for any clarifications you might need.
	quote

curiousuburb Antimatter Man Join Date: May 2004 Location: that interweb thing	2005-12-19, 13:37 Are you including the bezel in that calculation, or purely the picture tube measured on the diagonal? Is the bezel uniform size all the way around the tube? (many are deeper on the bottom to accomodate controls)
	quote

Kickaha Veteran Member Join Date: May 2004	2005-12-19, 13:47 height of current tube = x 27^2 = x^2 + (3/4x)^2 27^2 = (25/16)x^2 x = sqrt(27^2 * (16/25)) now plug that in for the other ratio: Z^2 = x^2 + (9/16x)^2 Z = sqrt((26^2 * 16/25) + (9/16(27^2 * (16/25)))^2) simple
	quote

alcimedes I shot the sherrif. administrator Join Date: May 2004	2005-12-19, 14:18 42"
	quote

BenP Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005	2005-12-19, 15:57 Huh...I got 33". Edit: I assumed the height was 3/4 of the width...is it the other way around? Never mind. Funny, alcimedes. Real funny.
	quote

Bryson Rocket Surgeon Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: The Canadark	2005-12-19, 16:28 From non-mathematical means, I can say that the 32" widescreen TV we bought at work looked the same height as the 27" 4:3 TV it replaced. Which is pretty much what you wanted to know, right? "...A smell of Petroleum prevails throughout..."
	quote

Bryson Rocket Surgeon Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: The Canadark	2005-12-19, 16:39 Except most manufacturers make TVs in 28", 32", 36" and 42" screens. (Well, and 50", and even 70".) So 32" is the closest TV you can buy.
	quote

alcimedes I shot the sherrif. administrator Join Date: May 2004	2005-12-19, 20:11 Correct. On all counts.
	quote

RowdyScot Ice Arrow Sniper Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Great Bay Temple	2005-12-19, 23:04 This thread just made my day
	quote

Brad Selfish Heathen administrator Join Date: May 2004 Location: Zone of Pain	2005-12-19, 23:28 I guess they're not teaching the Pythagorean theorem to kids these days any more, eh?
	quote

User Name		Remember Me?
Password

scratt Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: M-F: Thailand Weekends : F1 2010 - Various Tracks!	2005-12-19, 23:32 You could always measure your current tv height and then when in the shop find one with the same height using the same tape measure....
	quote

billybobsky BANNED I am worthless beyond hope. Join Date: May 2004 Location: Inner Swabia. If you have to ask twice, don't.	2005-12-20, 00:17 Why would you need to use the same tape measure? I thought we standardized these things for a reason...
	quote

Brad Selfish Heathen administrator Join Date: May 2004 Location: Zone of Pain	2005-12-20, 20:00 Yup. Along with some basic substitution, that's all you need to solve the problem.
	quote

shell Member Join Date: Oct 2005	2005-12-20, 23:33 Actually, considering the bezel your best bet is just sticking with the tape measure idea. Either that or "eyeball" it.
	quote

AppleNova Forums

Fun Math Problem