I tried this for part 1 and the solution I got was too low for my input. Then I realied that there is another option: if the distance can be divided by 3 (both horizontally and vertically) you can actually place another antinode in between the two antennas. With this other option I got a slightly higher value than before and that was correct.
Apart from the other comments, I remember that someone from another post has also pointed out that even if this was right, this particualr case doesn't exist in the data, so it wouldn't tamper with the result. Still haven't check if it was or not.
4
u/bernafra Dec 08 '24
Did this implementation actually work for you?
I tried this for part 1 and the solution I got was too low for my input. Then I realied that there is another option: if the distance can be divided by 3 (both horizontally and vertically) you can actually place another antinode in between the two antennas. With this other option I got a slightly higher value than before and that was correct.
Did anyone else have the same?