Can anyone see a better way of solving this?

  • Thread starter Thread starter memoguy
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem involving geometric relationships, likely in the context of triangulation or similar triangles, where the original poster has derived two equations and solved them simultaneously to arrive at a specific distance. They are seeking a potentially simpler method to achieve the same result.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster describes their method of solving the problem using simultaneous equations and expresses a desire for a non-simultaneous approach. Some participants question the necessity of this method and suggest alternatives like the law of sines.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants exploring different methods and questioning the assumptions behind the original approach. There is no clear consensus on the best method, and some participants are encouraging the original poster to share their work for further analysis.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a peer suggesting that the original poster is overthinking the problem, which introduces a layer of uncertainty regarding the perceived complexity of the solution. The original poster's reluctance to abandon simultaneous equations indicates a potential gap in understanding alternative methods.

memoguy
Messages
29
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



attachment.php?attachmentid=57710&stc=1&d=1365594222.jpg



Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I just derive two equations and solve simultaneously. It delivers the correct answer of 2933.5m. But it is a bit of a long method, can anyone see an easier way?
 

Attachments

  • question.jpg
    question.jpg
    27.4 KB · Views: 406
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Without seeing your work we can not tell if it can be done simpler.ehild
 
Sorry, what I mean is; is there any non-simultaneous way to solve this?
 
There is nothing wrong with your method. You might consider the law of sines for an alternative.
 
voko said:
There is nothing wrong with your method. You might consider the law of sines for an alternative.

Ok, cool. But that would still involve a simultaneous equation.
 
memoguy said:
Ok, cool. But that would still involve a simultaneous equation.

Why is it a problem? It is simple to solve. Show what you did.

Introduce the variable y/x. Or divide the equations with each other.

ehild
 
memoguy said:
Ok, cool. But that would still involve a simultaneous equation.

I do not think so.
 
ehild said:
Why is it a problem? It is simple to solve. Show what you did.

Introduce the variable y/x

ehild
No problem at all. Just that someone I was talking to kept saying that I was over thinking it by solving simultaneous but I just can't see how to get around that.

voko said:
I do not think so.

Ohh! How?
 
memoguy said:
Ohh! How?

What does the law of sines say?
 
  • #10
voko said:
What does the law of sines say?

sin(A)/a=sin(B)/b=...
 
  • #11
In your problem you have three points: the point of the first sighing, the second sighting, and the light itself. Let's call them A, B, C.

Can you find the length of AC or BC?
 
  • #12
no?

-memoguy
 
  • #13
no what?
 
  • #14
I am an idiot. I am so sorry, I see it now!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K