MHB Reflecting B(3,-1) on Line g: 4y + x - 15 = 0

  • Thread starter Thread starter Monoxdifly
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Line Mirror
AI Thread Summary
The reflection of point B(3, -1) across line g results in point B'(5, 7). The equation of line g is given as 4y + x - 15 = 0, but calculations show that the correct line should be 4y + x - 16 = 0, which is not listed among the options. The midpoint of the two points is (4, 3), and the slope of the line perpendicular to BB' is -1/4. There is a suggestion that option A may contain a typo, as the derived equation closely resembles it.
Monoxdifly
MHB
Messages
288
Reaction score
0
The point B(3, -1) is reflected by the line g and results in B'(5, 7). The equation of line g is ...
A. 4y + x - 15 = 0
B. 4y + x - 9 = 0
C. 4y + x + 15 = 0
D. 4y - x - 15 = 0
E. 4y - x - 9 = 0

Since I didn't know how to approach the problem in a formal, textbook way, I tried to get... creative. The point of reflection must be exactly in the middle of (3, -1) and (5, 7), that is, (4, 3). Since the mirror must be a line perpendicular to BB' (which has the slope 4) and going through (4, 3), the slope of the mirror is $$-\frac{1}{4}$$ and I substituted it in the $$y-y_1=m(x-x_1)$$ equation. This is what I got:
$$y-3=-\frac{1}{4}(x-4)$$
4(y - 3) = -(x - 4)
4y - 12 = -x + 4
4y + x - 12 - 4 = 0
4y + x - 16 = 0 which is not in any of the options, but really close to the option A. Can we just assume that the option A was a typo? Or did I make a mistake somewhere?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What I would do is observe that the line must pass through the midpoint of the two given points, and be perpendicular to the line through the two given points.The midpoint is:

$$\left(\frac{3+5}{2},\frac{-1+7}{2}\right)=(4,3)$$

The slope is:

$$m=-\frac{\Delta x}{\Delta y}=-\frac{5-3}{7+1}=-\frac{1}{4}$$

Thus, our line is:

$$y-3=-\frac{1}{4}(x-4)$$

Or:

$$4y-12=-x+4$$

Or:

$$4y+x-16=0$$

I agree with your answer. :)
 
Isn't that basically what I did?
 
Monoxdifly said:
Isn't that basically what I did?

Yes...it's just easier for me to work the problem and then compare results.
 
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...
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...
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...
Back
Top