Which Triangle has a larger altitude?

  • Thread starter Thread starter um0123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Altitude Triangle
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on determining the altitude of two equilateral triangles based on given dimensions. Triangle 1 has all sides measuring 2303.6, while Triangle 2 has sides of 2303.6, 2307.1, and 2300.2. Despite initial confusion regarding the properties of the triangles, it is established that both triangles have the same altitude, calculated as (1/2)√3 times the sum of their sides. The altitude for both triangles is confirmed to be equal due to their geometric properties.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of equilateral triangle properties
  • Familiarity with trigonometric functions and the sine rule
  • Knowledge of the centroid and its relation to triangle altitudes
  • Proficiency in using the Pythagorean theorem
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn the cosine rule in triangle geometry
  • Study the derivation of triangle altitudes using trigonometric identities
  • Explore CAD software for geometric modeling and visualization
  • Investigate the properties of similar triangles and their implications on altitude calculations
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, geometry students, CAD designers, and anyone interested in the properties of triangles and their altitudes.

um0123
Messages
151
Reaction score
0
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm confused by your question, as an altitude on a triangle tends to be the line from one point and perpendicular to the opposite side. In your first triangle it appears to meet that condition, but in the second it does not. If the triangles are equilateral then the perpendicular line should be in the centre of each side. The second triangle does not appear to meet this criteria.
 
all I am asking is for the height of the triangle given those measurements.
 
The center of a triangle is 1/3 the distance along each altitude. So since the center of each triangle is 665 from the base, the vertical(?) altitude of each is 3 times that, 1995.

But the second triangle is not equilateral. It has sides of 2303.6, 2307.1, and 2300.2
First triangle has all sides 2303.6.
 
how did you find the sides of second triangle?
 
im confused also.
 
Actually I drew it in a CAD program. Given a "center" point 665 above a base (side); draw circles centered on that point of radius 2* 664 & 2*666 to intersect the base at the vertices, draw 2 altitudes of 3*664 & 3*666 from vertices through center point, then can draw the 2 sides.
 
but that doesn't help me actually solve the problem...
 
Okay, once you have all the sides of the second triangle, apply cosine rule
a*a=b*b+c*c-2*b*cosA where a, b and c are the sides opposite to angles A, B and C of triangle ABC. Thus you can find an angle of the triangle. then apply trigonometry. altitude=side*sinA. This should solve your problem
 
  • #10
how do i get all the sides of the second triangle?
 
  • #11
If you draw it with all the known information I think the solution will come to you..
Draw all three altitudes, which then forms 6 smaller triangles.
you know the length of all 3 altitudes, as well as the distance between the vertex & the center of each (which is 2/3 of the altitude).
Using the pythagorean theorem, you find the length of all other sides.
 
  • #12
but when u draw it it doesn't form 6 smaller triangles it forms 3 smaller quadralaterals. I am confused!
 
  • #13
OK in looking closer I see that I used a wrong assumption, that an altitude passes through the center of the triangle. That's only for an equilateral triangle. But, it is true that the distance from a center to a side (perpendicular) is one-third the altitude. So, you can still conclude both triangles have the same altitude. But what the triangle dimensions are, I don't see the derivation.
 
  • #14
no, they are both equilateral but only the first one has an altitude of 3 times the center to the side. The second one has different legnth to the center but is somehow still equilateral.
 
Last edited:
  • #15
Well I just have to disagree about the second triangle being equilateral, isn't possible if those dimensions are distances to the centroid. Every triangle has a perpendicular distance to the centroid of 1/3 the perpendicular height, for each side. So I still contend that both triangles have the same altitude.

I also redrew it more accurately in CAD, so that the centroid is 1/3 along each altitude, and each angle bisector passes through the centroid, and get the same triangle sides I gave in Post #4, just to more decimal places. I don't know how to solve it directly, in CAD I iterated on an accurate solution. The second triangle is "similar" to the first, with its top vertex displaced about 4.5 to the right.

**edit - attached dimensioned triangle**
 

Attachments

Last edited:
  • #16
Suppose the points at the base of the perpendiculars are A, B and C, the middle of the triangle is M. The corner between A and B is called D, between B and C is called E and between C and A is called F
Known are lenghts AM, BM and CM which we'll call a, b and c

The tetrangle AMBD has two adjacent sides known and all the corners are known, so it should be possible to find the other 2 sides. I did this by using coordinates, setting the corner D at (0,0) calling AD = d, so point A is at (d,0) and point M is at (d,a). Now find the point of intersection of the lines BD: y = sqrt(3)x and MB: y = (1/3)sqrt(3)(d-x) + a.
the distance from the intersection point found and M should be equal to b. This equation allows you to find AD. The same argument allows you to find AF from the tetrangle AMCF, and AD+AF is a side of the triangle, since it's equilateral, the altitude is (1/2)sqrt(3) times the side.
 
  • #17
If both triangles are equilateral, it is safe to say that on the first the lines are serving as both the altitudes and the medians. On the second it seems that the lines are neither altitudes or medians.

My assumption is that the lines do not intercept with the corners in the second triangle, as this would change the dimensions of the sides and mean that the triangle is not equilateral.
 
  • #18
willem2 said:
Suppose the points at the base of the perpendiculars are A, B and C, the middle of the triangle is M. The corner between A and B is called D, between B and C is called E and between C and A is called F
Known are lenghts AM, BM and CM which we'll call a, b and c

The tetrangle AMBD has two adjacent sides known and all the corners are known, so it should be possible to find the other 2 sides. I did this by using coordinates, setting the corner D at (0,0) calling AD = d, so point A is at (d,0) and point M is at (d,a). Now find the point of intersection of the lines BD: y = sqrt(3)x and MB: y = (1/3)sqrt(3)(d-x) + a.
the distance from the intersection point found and M should be equal to b. This equation allows you to find AD. The same argument allows you to find AF from the tetrangle AMCF, and AD+AF is a side of the triangle, since it's equilateral, the altitude is (1/2)sqrt(3) times the side.

After a dense page of calculations the answer is surprisingly simple:

AD = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(a+2b)
AF = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(a+2c)
BD = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(b+2a)
BE = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(b+2c)
CE = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(c+2b)
CF = \frac {1}{3}\sqrt{3}(c+2a)

the length of al the sides is \frac {2}{3}\sqrt{3}(a+b+c)

so the altitude is \frac {1}{2}\sqrt{3}(a+b+c)

(a+b+c) is the same for both problems, so the altitude is the same
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K