Proving the Maximum Volume of a Rectangular Parallelepiped: A Geometric Analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter John O' Meara
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Maximum Volume
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around proving that the maximum volume of a rectangular parallelepiped with a fixed surface area occurs when it is a cube. The original poster introduces variables for volume, dimensions, and surface area, and expresses a need for assistance in starting the proof.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss various methods to approach the problem, including the potential use of Lagrange multipliers and alternative algebraic manipulations to express volume in terms of other dimensions. Some question the necessity of advanced methods given the context of their study materials.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different mathematical approaches and expressing varying levels of familiarity with the concepts involved. There is an acknowledgment of the need to derive relationships between the dimensions and volume without relying on Lagrange multipliers, suggesting a productive direction for the conversation.

Contextual Notes

One participant notes that their textbook does not cover Lagrange multipliers, indicating a constraint on the methods they can use. This raises questions about the assumptions underlying the problem setup and the definitions of the variables involved.

John O' Meara
Messages
325
Reaction score
0
Prove that the maximum volume of a rectangular parallelepiped with a fixed surface area is when it is a cube.

Volume = v, length = l, width = w, height = h and surface area = s. Then we have: v = l*w*h = h^3. s = 2*w*l + 2*w*h + 2*h*l = constant = 6*h^2.

For a maximum to exist [tex](\frac{{\partial ^2 y}}{{\partial x^2 }})(\frac{{\partial^2 y}}{{\partial x^2}}) - (\frac{{\partial^2 y}}{{\partial x}{\partial t }})[/tex] > 0.

Where x, y and t are unknown to me. I just need some help to get started. Thank you very much.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you might try using the method of Lagrange multipliers, maximizing [tex]f(l, w, h) = v[/tex] under the condtion that [tex]\phi (l, w, h)= s[/tex] where v and s are constants with the multiplier [tex]\lamda[/tex].
 
Last edited:
The book that I am using is an introduction to Calculus, which does not have Lagrange multipliers in it. So by asking this question, it would imply that the question can be done without recourse to Lagrange multipliers. So I would think.
Anyway thanks for the reply.
 
Okay, You know that the surface area of a given x by y by z parallelogram is 2xy+ 2xz+ 2yz= A and the volume is V= xyz.
From 2xy+ 2xz+ 2yz= A, you know that z(2x+2y)= A- 2xy so z= (A- 2xy)/(2x+ 2y). That means that, as a function of x and y, V= xy((A- 2xy)/(2x+ 2y))

Now, what does that tell you?
 
I can do the following: [tex]\frac{{\partial V}}{{\partial x }} = 0 \\[/tex] and [tex]\frac{{ \partial V}}{{\partial y}} = 0 \\[/tex], and then solve for x and y. To find that [tex]x^2 = Y^2 \\[/tex]. Then I can find an expression for V in terms of z and y only, then [tex]\frac{{ \partial V}}{{\partial z}} = 0 \\[/tex] and solve for y and z to get: [tex]y^2 = z^2[/tex] Thanks for the reply.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
15K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K