What Is the Minimum Height of a Rear-View Mirror to See the Entire Rear Window?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetgirl86
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Reflection
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the minimum height of a rear-view mirror needed for a driver to see the entire rear window without moving their head. The dimensions of the rear window and the distances from the driver's eyes to the mirror and rear window are provided. Participants emphasize using geometric principles and similar triangles to derive the correct formula, highlighting the importance of understanding the relationship between angles of incidence and reflection. A successful solution was reached by applying these concepts, leading to the correct height calculation. The conversation underscores the need for a solid grasp of fundamental physics principles in solving such problems.
sweetgirl86
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
I have been trying to solve this problem using many equations, but am not getting the right answer. I guess I'm not using the right formula because I don't know it. Can someone please help.

The rear window in a car is approximately a rectangle, 1.17 m wide and 0.160 m high. The inside rear-view mirror is 0.600 m from the driver's eyes, and 1.23 m from the rear window. What is the minimum height of the rear-view mirror if the driver is to be able to see the entire height of the rear window in the mirror without moving her head?
do: 1.23m
di: 0.600m
ho: 0.160m
hi: ?

hi = (di/do)ho = (0.600/1.23)0.160m = 0.0780m
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
This is how i tried to solve it:

do: 1.23m
di: 0.600m
ho: 0.160m
hi: ?

hi = (di/do)ho = (0.600/1.23)0.160m = 0.0780m
 
This sounds like triangles and simple ratios, sweetgirl. Unfold the reflection, then you've got a triangle .6m long within a triangle 1.23m + .6m long. Do you know if the first answer is

.16 x .6 / 1.83 = .05245
 
sweetgirl86 said:
This is how i tried to solve it:

do: 1.23m
di: 0.600m
ho: 0.160m
hi: ?

hi = (di/do)ho = (0.600/1.23)0.160m = 0.0780m
Where does this equation come from? It is wrong.

If you draw a diagram and identify the correct similar triangles, you will get the correct formula.

Physics is not about trying different formulas and hoping one of them works. It is about arriving at the correct formula by a combination of math and a knowledge of the fundamental principles.

In this case, since the rear-view mirror must be assumed to be planar, the principle that is relevant is the relationship between the angle of incidence and reflection. From there, it's just a geomtry problem.

Can you draw a diagram, label the various points and find the relationship from there? Have you come across the simpler problem where you are asked to find out how tall a mirror you need to completely view yourself? If not, it might be instructive to first attempt this simpler problem before going on to the one you have.
 
Last edited:
Thank You so much. I tried solving it the triangle way and go the right answer. And yes that's the right answer farsight. Thank you all so much. I solved the second part by myself :-).
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top