|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 3:12 pm
Okay, I've got this problem in homework. I'm hoping someone here can help me out.
Show that the transformation is an isometry by using the Distance Formula to compare the side lengths of the triangles.
triangle FGH -> triangle RST
F(-1,-1)
G(-4,2)
H(-1,4)
R(1,-1)
S(2,2)
T(4,-1)
Here's where I get stuck:
line FG= square root of [(-4+1)squared + (2+1)squared]
square root of [(-3)squared + 3squared]
square root of [9+9]
square root of 18 <- Final Answer
line RS= square root of [(2-1)squared + (2+1)squared]
square root of [1squared + 3squared]
square root of [1+9]
square root of 10 <- Final Answer
Where did I go wrong? (And I do apologize for not being able to do subscripts and stuff. sweatdrop )
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 2:22 pm
Shebakune Okay, I've got this problem in homework. I'm hoping someone here can help me out. Show that the transformation is an isometry by using the Distance Formula to compare the side lengths of the triangles. triangle FGH -> triangle RST F(-1,-1) G(-4,2) H(-1,4) R(1,-1) S(2,2) T(4,-1) Here's where I get stuck: line FG= square root of [(-4+1)squared + (2+1)squared] square root of [(-3)squared + 3squared] square root of [9+9] square root of 18 <- Final Answer line RS= square root of [(2-1)squared + (2+1)squared] square root of [1squared + 3squared] square root of [1+9] square root of 10 <- Final Answer Where did I go wrong? (And I do apologize for not being able to do subscripts and stuff. sweatdrop ) Sorry, but it looks to me as if you did both calculations correctly, it's possible that your teacher didn't mean for FG and RS to be the congruent sides; however I still don't see a side on the RST triangle whose length is sqrt(18 ). Is it possible that your professor gave you the wrong vertices? (If you draw the triangles it's very clear that the transformation is not an isometry)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 5:49 pm
grey wanderer Sorry, but it looks to me as if you did both calculations correctly, it's possible that your teacher didn't mean for FG and RS to be the congruent sides; however I still don't see a side on the RST triangle whose length is sqrt(18 ). Is it possible that your professor gave you the wrong vertices? (If you draw the triangles it's very clear that the transformation is not an isometry) First of all, thank-you for answering this post. This problem came from my text book and everyone else I showed the problem to came up with the same conclusion as you did. And I wrote the coordinates correctly from the drawing in the book- people checked that. It must be a book goof. Again, thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 6:35 am
Ah, I hate book goofs. It's like, "here's how you do it... wrong, but we say it's right." Completely undermines the confidence of mathematics students.
I just sat in on an Alg I class. It was horrifying. gonk
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2008 10:05 am
MyOwnBestCritic Ah, I hate book goofs. It's like, "here's how you do it... wrong, but we say it's right." Completely undermines the confidence of mathematics students. I just sat in on an Alg I class. It was horrifying. gonk Lol!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 19, 2008 4:08 pm
ya book goofs are horrible especially where like its a hard and long long problem lol and you find out its a goof when you did all the work stare crying
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
