At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga.
Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus.
Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.

Get our expert's

answer on brainly

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

Get your **free** account and access **expert** answers to this and **thousands** of other questions.

See more answers at brainly.com

Join Brainly to access

this expert answer

SEE EXPERT ANSWER

To see the **expert** answer you'll need to create a **free** account at **Brainly**

truthfolly i just have the answer.. i dont have the solution too

what do you mean by quad please explain a little : )

lol! ishaan a quadrilateral of course!!!! not a square

For a quadrilateral, each length has to be less than the sum of the other 3 lengths, i.e. \(a**
**

ya i agree

So we rule out the cases where 3 cuts appear in one half of the rod.

yes agreed

wait
how is it 0.5*0.5*0.5???????????

The answer isn't 0.5 is it?

BINGO

how did you do it???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

nice guess sir.. i still want the solution though...

Dalvoron\?

Working on it...

Nah, I'm stumped. Integration was never my strong point.

actually you do not need integration for this problem, but as i recall it is a bear

plz help satellite!!

Maybe an addition series that approximates to 0.5?

Or tends towards it, or whatever.

i have seen this for a triangle, but there it is just in two dimensions. here you are in three.

so it is going to be a volume problem rather than an area one. hold on

I assumed it was in one dimension. Things just got harder.

did you first do the triangle problem?

Hah, nice.

Well got to go to work now anyway. I'll come back to this later.

oh and if you keep reading it gets better

much much better. so perhaps we go to the end an mimic the "simple proof' for the case n = 4

yes so what is the non probability proof?

satelite? you there?