calling your method complex was wrong but actually my approach is not weird rather it's true according to the fundamental calculus laws, if you go through the application of derivatives section in calculus you would find that equating first derivative to zero gives you the actual extremum point that may be minimum or maximum (whatever exists),
my solution is a bit lengthy and more inefficient, i agree

just print the given array and average and your answer in your solution, you will get to know all the test case

yeah i agree

this is fine but a note has been put down there that the maximum height recorded is not necessarily the maximum height reached(as we are checking for every 10th of a second only, not for more smaller fractions), but this code violates this note, it takes the maximum height reached into consideration,

this is fine but a note has been put down there that the maximum height recorded is not necessarily the maximum height reached(as we are checking for every 10th of a second only, not for more smaller fractions), but this code violates this note, it takes the maximum height reached into consideration,

this is fine but a note has been put down there that the maximum height recorded is not necessarily the maximum height reached(as we are checking for every 10th of a second only, not for more smaller fractions), but this code violates this note, it takes the maximum height reached into consideration

this is fine but a note has been put down there that the maximum height recorded is not necessarily the maximum height reached(as we are checking for every 10th of a second only, not for more smaller fractions), but this code violates this note, it takes the maximum height reached into consideration,

this is fine but a note has been put down there that the maximum height recorded is not necessarily the maximum height reached(as we are checking for every 10th of a second only, not for more smaller fractions), but this code violates this note, it takes the maximum height reached into consideration,