I do not believe that it can be done. You can get an estimate using either of the following methods:
Uniform Lamina: Copy the shape onto a sheet (lamina) of material with uniform density. Cut the shape out carefully and measure its mass (or weight). Do the same for a unit square of the lamina. Then, because the lamina is of uniform density, the ratio of the two areas is the same as the ratio of the two masses. That is: Area of Shape/Area of Unit Square = Mass of Shape/Mass of Unit Square. Rearranging, and noting that the area of the Unit Square is, by definition, = 1 sq unit Area of Shape = Mass of Shape/Mass of Unit Square. Grid Method: Copy the shape onto a grid, where each grid square has an area of G square units. Count the number of squares that are fully or mostly inside the shape. Call this number W (for whole). Count the number of squares that are approximately half inside the shape and call this number H (for half). Ignore any square that are less than half in the shape. Then a reasonable estimate of the area of the shape is G*[W + H/2] square units. There is some arbitrariness about “mostly inside†and “approximately half†but there is no way around that. You will get more accurate results with finer grids, but they will also require much more effort in terms of counting the grid squares.
There are infinitely many possible shapes. Apart from a scalene triangle, none have a specific name. They are irregular polygons, but that is not enough. Irregular polygons can have equal sides (if there is at least one angle that is not equal to the rest) or equal angles (if there is at least one side that is not equal to the rest).
Using the breaking apart method, what is the best way to multiply 8 by 7?
Without: outside, missing, apart from, not in place of, out, left out, aside from
There are infinitely many possible answers. A polygon is an enclosed plane area whose boundaries comprise straight lines. The number of sides can have any value greater than 2. So apart from 4, which is a quadrilateral, you will have a name for a polygon with 3, 5, 6, 7, ... sides!
42 x 8 = (40 x 8) + (2 x 8)
Not possible without breaking it.
Not possible without breaking it.
Yes, "breaking apart" is the progressive form of the particle verb "break apart". E.g., "He is breaking apart the rocks" or "The rocks are breaking apart".
breaking
The Art of Breaking Apart was created on 2009-10-27.
C When hammered, gold expands without breaking apart
There are infinitely many possible shapes. Apart from a scalene triangle, none have a specific name. They are irregular polygons, but that is not enough. Irregular polygons can have equal sides (if there is at least one angle that is not equal to the rest) or equal angles (if there is at least one side that is not equal to the rest).
It is mechanical weathering, like a rock being tumbled by a river.
456
They didn't split apart...
Fracture
Aro is apart of new moon & breaking dawn