MHB Contradictory Scalene Obtuse Tn Heights

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kruidnootje
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the geometric properties of a triangle plotted on Google Earth, with points A, B, and C representing specific distances. The perimeter of the triangle is calculated at 6001 km, while the area is noted as 57,491 km². A discrepancy arises when calculating the height from angle B, leading to confusion about whether the triangle can be accurately represented on a curved surface. Participants debate the nature of the triangle, questioning the right angle assumption based on the described positions of points A, B, and C. The conversation highlights the complexities of mapping large distances on a spherical Earth versus a flat plane.
Kruidnootje
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
I plotted 3 points on Google Earth.
West (point A) to slightly North point (point B)= 1284 Km A-B
From Point B to further East Point (point C) = 1717 Km
Then a straight direct line from point C back to point A

The Perimeter = 6001 Km
Area = 57 491 Km

Angle A = 1.711 degrees
Angle B = 177.01 degrees
Angle C = 1.279 degrees
(sorry can't find any degree sign symbol on the right)

Problem:
When I drop a perpendicular line down from Angle B to the longest line (3000) the height is 18 Km
When I calculate by using the formula h = 57491/1500 = 38.33 Km

Is the discrepancy caused by the curvature of the Earth on Google maps? Can one even form an accurate triangular representation in this manner?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
If you were working on a flat plane then you would have a right triangle with legs of length 1284 and 1717 km. The third side, the hypotenuse would have length $\sqrt{(1284)^2+ (1717)^2}= 2144$ km so the perimeter would be $1284+ 1717+ 2144= 5145$ km, not the "6000" km you have.

Since this is already a right triangle, I don't know why you construct another altitude. The area is just (1/2)(1284)(1717)= 1102314 square kilometers.

(And the area is in square kilometers, not kilometers.)
 
View attachment 8035

Hallo countryboy
As you can see from the actual measurements in google Earth I am a little confused as to how this is a right triangle? I see the math you have done but that leaves me a bit bewildered when viewing the actual physical situation.
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2018-04-01 at 15.39.34.png
    Screen shot 2018-04-01 at 15.39.34.png
    2 KB · Views: 107
You said, in your original post,
"I plotted 3 points on Google Earth.
West (point A) to slightly North point (point B)= 1284 Km A-B
From Point B to further East Point (point C) = 1717 Km
Then a straight direct line from point C back to point A"

If point B is "slightly north" of point A and point C is "further east" of point C, then angle ABC is a right angle. I don't see how the "map" you show has anything to do with your original description.
 
Country Boy said:
If point B is "slightly north" of point A and point C is "further east" of point C, then angle ABC is a right angle. I don't see how the "map" you show has anything to do with your original description.

Well I suppose it would appear that I should have said, A is west, B is the upper middle point and C is East. Then C back to A is a straight line. I am sorry if the original description was mis-leading you, regardless though, the question still remains now does this make your calculations wrong, or are they correct because you have allowed for something that I missed?
Thankyou countryboy
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top