MHB Dimension of the cut-out squares that result in largest possible side area

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on maximizing the side area of a topless square box created by cutting squares from the corners of a 12-inch metal sheet. The variable "x" represents the side length of the cut-out squares, leading to a box length of 12-2x once folded. The total side area is expressed as A = 4x(12-2x), focusing on the area of all four sides. There is some confusion regarding the interpretation of "largest side area," whether it refers to the area of one side or all four sides, but calculations yield consistent results regardless of interpretation. Ultimately, the goal is to determine the optimal dimensions of the cut-out squares for maximum side area.
obesiston
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
A topless square box is made by cutting little squares out of the four corners of a square sheet of metal 12 inches on a side, and then folding up the resulting flaps. What is the largest side area which can be made in this way?

What information I have so far is that since the side of the little squares are unknown, I called them "x", and so since the length of the full box is 12 inches, once folded up I'd have 12-2x. One thing I'm having trouble with is setting up my equation. I've done a similar problem before where it asks for volume, but I don't fully understand what it means by "side area." I also need to complete the perfect square to find dimension of the cut-out squares that result in largest possible side area.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
four sides, each with area $x(12-2x)$

therefore, total side area, $A = 4x(12-2x)$
 
I would be inclined to think that "side area" means "area of the sides" which is what what skeeter calculated.
 
If you interpret "largest side area" as meaning the area of one side, instead of all four, or the area of the four sides plus the bottom, you get the same answer so it really doesn't matter!
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top