Square metric not satisfying the SAS postulate

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter pholee95
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Metric Square
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the square metric distance in R^2 and its implications for the SAS (Side-Angle-Side) postulate in geometry. Participants explore whether R^2 with the square metric and standard angle measurement can satisfy the SAS postulate through examples and reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose using a right triangle with vertices at (0,0), (1,0), and (0,1) to illustrate the problem.
  • Participants suggest rotating the triangle by 45 degrees while maintaining angles and side lengths according to the square metric.
  • There is a claim that the resulting triangle's sides do not maintain equal lengths, specifically questioning the length of the third side after rotation.
  • One participant confirms that the first triangle has all sides of metric length 1, while the second triangle has sides of lengths 1, 1, and 2, indicating a discrepancy.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the example used to illustrate the problem, but there is an ongoing debate about the implications for the SAS postulate and whether the metric lengths can be considered congruent.

Contextual Notes

The discussion does not resolve the implications of the square metric on the SAS postulate, and assumptions regarding congruency and metric definitions remain unexamined.

pholee95
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure on how to do this problem. Can someone please help and explain? Thank you!

Recall (Exercise 3.2.8) that the square metric distance between two points (x1, y1) and
(x2, y2) in R^2 is given by D((x1, y1), (x2, y2))= max{|x2 − x1|, |y2 − y1|}. Show by
example that R^2 with the square metric and the usual angle measurement function does
not satisfy the SAS Postulate.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
pholee95 said:
I'm not sure on how to do this problem. Can someone please help and explain? Thank you!

Recall (Exercise 3.2.8) that the square metric distance between two points (x1, y1) and
(x2, y2) in R^2 is given by D((x1, y1), (x2, y2))= max{|x2 − x1|, |y2 − y1|}. Show by
example that R^2 with the square metric and the usual angle measurement function does
not satisfy the SAS Postulate.

Hi pholee95! Welcome to MHB! ;)

Let's pick a simple triangle, like a rectangular one with points (0,0), (1,0), (0,1).
Now let's rotate it by 45 degrees, keeping the angles the same, and keeping the lengths of the side according to the metric the same.
Then we'll get the triangle with points (0,0), (1,1), (1,-1).
According to the SAS postulate it should then be congruent.
But congruency requires that the lengths of all sides are the same. Is the (metric) length of the 3rd side the same?
 
I like Serena said:
Hi pholee95! Welcome to MHB! ;)

Let's pick a simple triangle, like a rectangular one with points (0,0), (1,0), (0,1).
Now let's rotate it by 45 degrees, keeping the angles the same, and keeping the lengths of the side according to the metric the same.
Then we'll get the triangle with points (0,0), (1,1), (1,-1).
According to the SAS postulate it should then be congruent.
But congruency requires that the lengths of all sides are the same. Is the (metric) length of the 3rd side the same?

No it won't be the same. Right?
 
pholee95 said:
No it won't be the same. Right?

Correct. All sides of the first triangle have metric length 1.
But the second triangle has metric lengths 1, 1, and 2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K