Why do we take slope as rise over run?


by Juwane
Tags: rise, slope
Juwane
Juwane is offline
#1
Dec31-09, 01:44 PM
P: 87
Why do we take slope=rise/run (or y/x)?

Is it just a definition, or does it have a special significance?

Why can't we take slope as run/rise (i.e. x/y)?
Phys.Org News Partner Mathematics news on Phys.org
Researchers help Boston Marathon organizers plan for 2014 race
'Math detective' analyzes odds for suspicious lottery wins
Pseudo-mathematics and financial charlatanism
mathman
mathman is offline
#2
Dec31-09, 03:14 PM
Sci Advisor
P: 5,935
It is the definition. In general it is dy/dx.
DaveC426913
DaveC426913 is offline
#3
Dec31-09, 03:19 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,325
I think it's related to the definition of a function.

A function a unique y for any given x; it does not necessarily have a unique x for any y.

HallsofIvy
HallsofIvy is offline
#4
Jan1-10, 06:35 AM
Math
Emeritus
Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 38,877

Why do we take slope as rise over run?


Slope answers "how fast is y increasing compared with x". It is exactly the same as dividing distance by time to find speed.
Mentallic
Mentallic is offline
#5
Jan1-10, 06:42 AM
HW Helper
P: 3,434
Quote Quote by HallsofIvy View Post
Slope answers "how fast is y increasing compared with x". It is exactly the same as dividing distance by time to find speed.
Yes but if it were run/rise then we would just make it conventional to plot distance on the x-axis and time on the y-axis.
I believe it's just the way they defined it. We need it to be one or the other, so why not just choose?
statdad
statdad is offline
#6
Jan1-10, 09:31 AM
HW Helper
P: 1,344
You can think of slope as the "math generalization" of the way we measure the pitch of a roof or the incline of a hill - both those measure rise over run, albeit in different language. Those ideas were generalized and 'abstracted' (if that isn't a word, it should be) to the notion of slope in the plane.
DaveC426913
DaveC426913 is offline
#7
Jan1-10, 12:50 PM
DaveC426913's Avatar
P: 15,325
Quote Quote by Mentallic View Post
Yes but if it were run/rise then we would just make it conventional to plot distance on the x-axis and time on the y-axis.
I believe it's just the way they defined it. We need it to be one or the other, so why not just choose?
When graphing values, the convention - because it's easier to read and interpret - is to put the consistent value along the x-axis and the dependent value on the y-axis. That way, the graph is "read" left-to-right.
Joe Hx
Joe Hx is offline
#8
Jan5-10, 10:15 PM
P: 3
having slope = dy/dx also makes the equation y = mx + b much prettier.
ideasrule
ideasrule is offline
#9
Jan6-10, 01:16 AM
HW Helper
ideasrule's Avatar
P: 2,324
high slope = graph goes up really quickly = high speed, acceleration, flow rate, whatever

The other way round:

high slope = graph goes up really slowly = low speed, acceleration, flow rate, whatever

seems counter-intuitive
Tac-Tics
Tac-Tics is offline
#10
Jan7-10, 04:30 PM
P: 810
Quote Quote by Juwane View Post
Is it just a definition, or does it have a special significance?
Rise over run is convenient because it "always works" in calculus. The definition of a derivative is the limit of the fraction with f(x+h) - f(x) on top and h on the bottom as h approaches 0. We have no guarantees what f(x+h) - f(x) might be. But we know for damn sure that the denominator, h, will never be equal to zero. And since the only restriction on division is that the denominator can't be zero, we know the derivative will never "blow up".
Rasalhague
Rasalhague is offline
#11
Jan7-10, 05:43 PM
P: 1,400
Surely just a convention, isn't it? If the the tradition had been to draw graphs with the independent variable on the vertical axis, I bet we'd be able to come up with just as many reasons why that was the most natural and intuitive way. Then run-over-rise would be the one that'd conveniently "always work" in calculus, because a function--by the definition of a function--would never have a horizontal slope. In that bizarro universe, Joe Hx would be telling us how much prettier x = my + b is than y = mx + b, and ideasrule might be saying how much more intuitive it was to represent greater speed, acceleration, etc. with a more forward slanting slope than a sluggish, bunched up one that hardly got off the starting blocks of the vertical axis. Actually the books on relativity that I've seen mostly do follow that convention, putting time on the vertical axis and using the horizontal axis to represent some dimension of space, labelled x.


Register to reply

Related Discussions
I figured out the slope for a force vs mass graph but does a slope have units? Introductory Physics Homework 2
Lag in rise of CO2 Earth 0
Difference between calcultaed slope and slope given on the graph? Introductory Physics Homework 1
does hot air rise? Classical Physics 12