total area of a poylgon?

ashagplz · 6 Dec 2006 at 13:18

anyone know how to calculate the total area of a polygon? Im trying to work out the total square km for a polygon of:
5.2km x 1.2km x 2.4km x 2.4km x 3.6km

badgermonkey · 6 Dec 2006 at 13:20

Draw a diagram. Split it up into smaller squares/triangles. Find the areas of each and add them up.

thelonecrouton · 6 Dec 2006 at 13:22

Divide it into 3 triangles and use pythagoras to calculate the area of each, then add 'em up...?

gjrc · 6 Dec 2006 at 13:26

seriously it would have been way quicker to use google rather than ask here

:confused:

BrenOS · 6 Dec 2006 at 13:58

5.2km x 1.2km x 2.4km x 2.4km x 3.6km = 129.4 km LOOSERS :rolleyes:

badgermonkey · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:00

BrenOS said:
5.2km x 1.2km x 2.4km x 2.4km x 3.6km = 129.4 km LOOSERS

You're just dumb. No really. And this isn't a personal attack since you called me a loser first.

You don't just multiply the sides together for a complex polygon.

alexthecheese · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:00

I was about to berrate you there for multiplying them all together, which is what you've done, but... that just isn't right, surely?!

badgermonkey · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:01

alexthecheese said:
I was about to berrate you there for multiplying them all together, which is what you've done, but... that just isn't right, surely?!

See above. No it's not.

DaveF · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:02

ashagplz said:
anyone know how to calculate the total area of a polygon? Im trying to work out the total square km for a polygon of:
5.2km x 1.2km x 2.4km x 2.4km x 3.6km

If that's all you've got to go on, you can't. Just knowing the lengths of the sides doesn't tell you enough about the shape of the polygon to answer (unless the polygon is a triangle, which it isn't here).

ashagplz · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:02

i did try a google search but couldnt find anything i understood... :rolleyes:

alexthecheese · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:04

badgermonkey said:
You're just dumb. No really. And this isn't a personal attack since you called me a loser first.

You don't just multiply the sides together for a complex polygon.

But did he really attack you? He called you a 'looser'. Maybe that's just for being 'out there', on your own, not afraid to be out of the crowd and willing to stand up for your own rights. In this modern day of sheep wearing GAP clothing, it could be a fine word of encouragement.

Ken · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:04

He was joking.

alexthecheese · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:05

badgermonkey said:
See above. No it's not.

That's what I thought, I just didn't want to go off on one and use the all powerful roll-eye smiley and then find that it was actually as simple as that.

Damn loosers!

Johninho · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:52

is it loosers or losers? two different spellings here!!

VeNT · 6 Dec 2006 at 14:54

Johninho said:
is it loosers or losers? two different spellings here!!

depends if your a loser or just looser.

badgermonkey · 6 Dec 2006 at 15:02

Johninho said:
is it loosers or losers? two different spellings here!!

Looser is not a word.

EDIT: Looser is a word. it means its more loose.

Spamalot · 6 Dec 2006 at 15:21

DaveF said:
If that's all you've got to go on, you can't. Just knowing the lengths of the sides doesn't tell you enough about the shape of the polygon to answer (unless the polygon is a triangle, which it isn't here).

Thats not true, not matter what order you put the sides in the area in the middle will still be the same (although the shape would look very different). I just dont know how you would go about working it out.

Haircut · 6 Dec 2006 at 15:25

Spamalot said:
Thats not true, not matter what order you put the sides in the area in the middle will still be the same (although the shape would look very different). I just dont know how you would go about working it out.

That's a load of rubbish!
I can quite easily produce two polygons with the sides all the same length, but different areas.

Gavstar · 6 Dec 2006 at 15:26

Spamalot said:
Thats not true, not matter what order you put the sides in the area in the middle will still be the same (although the shape would look very different). I just dont know how you would go about working it out.

That not right either

badgermonkey · 6 Dec 2006 at 15:26

Haircut said:
That's a load of rubbish!
I can quite easily produce two polygons with the sides all the same length, but different areas.

I don't think so