MHB How Do Shadows and Sun Angles Relate to Tree Height?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xyz_1965
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Application Tree
xyz_1965
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
A tree casts a 23-foot shadow when the angle of elevation of the sun is 52 degrees.

(A) Find the height of the tree.

(B) Find the length of the shadow when the angle of elevation of the sun is 38 degrees.Part (A)

Let h = height of tree

tan(52°) = h/52

tan(52°)(23) = h

29.4386575404 = h

Rounding off to the nearest ones place, I get 29 feet.

The tree is 29 feet.

Part (B)

Let s = length of shadow

tan(38°) = 29/s

s = 29/tan(38°)

s = 37.1183073336

After rounding to the nearest unit, I get 37 feet.

The shadow is 37 feet.

Is this right?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
xyz_1965 said:
A tree casts a 23-foot shadow when the angle of elevation of the sun is 52 degrees.

(A) Find the height of the tree.

(B) Find the length of the shadow when the angle of elevation of the sun is 38 degrees.Part (A)

Let h = height of tree.

tan(52°) = h/52

$\color{red} \tan(52) =h/23$

tan(52°)(23) = h

29.4386575404 = h

Rounding off to the nearest ones place, I get 29 feet.

The tree is 29 feet.

Part (B)

Let s = length of shadow

tan(38°) = 29/s

$\color{red} \text{I wouldn’t use the rounded value of the height in subsequent calculations. Final shadow length is closer to 38 ft}$
s = 29/tan(38°)

s = 37.1183073336

After rounding to the nearest unit, I get 37 feet.

The shadow is 37 feet.

Is this right?

see above $\color{red}\text{comments}$ in the quote.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
skeeter said:
see above $\color{red}\text{comments}$ in the quote.

Thank you for correcting my typos.
 
xyz_1965 said:
Thank you for correcting my typos.
It is fine to round a final result, but using a rounded intermediate result for more calculations (in part B) is a bit more serious than a typo. It means that the final result of B will be "off".
 
Klaas van Aarsen said:
It is fine to round a final result, but using a rounded intermediate result for more calculations (in part B) is a bit more serious than a typo. It means that the final result of B will be "off".

I'll try to be careful in my rounding off.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top