Square metric not satisfying the SAS postulate

In summary: Correct. All sides of the first triangle have metric length 1.According to the SAS postulate, the triangles should be congruent.According to the SAS postulate, the triangles should be congruent.
  • #1
pholee95
10
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.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
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?
 
  • #3
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?
 
  • #4
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.
 

FAQ: Square metric not satisfying the SAS postulate

What does it mean for a square to not satisfy the SAS postulate?

The SAS (Side-Angle-Side) postulate is a rule in geometry that states if two triangles have two sides and the included angle of one triangle equal to two sides and the included angle of the other triangle, then the triangles are congruent. If a square does not satisfy this postulate, it means that the sides and angles of the square do not match up with another triangle, making it impossible for the two shapes to be congruent.

Why is it important for squares to satisfy the SAS postulate?

The SAS postulate is important because it is one of the ways to prove that two triangles are congruent. If a square does not satisfy this postulate, it means that it cannot be proven to be congruent to any other triangle using this method. This could lead to incorrect conclusions and misunderstandings in geometry.

Can a square ever not satisfy the SAS postulate?

Yes, a square can fail to satisfy the SAS postulate. This can happen if the given side lengths and angles of the square do not match up with any other triangle. For example, a square with side lengths of 4cm and an included angle of 90 degrees cannot be proven to be congruent to any other triangle using the SAS postulate.

What other postulates or theorems can be used to prove the congruency of squares?

There are several other postulates and theorems that can be used to prove the congruency of squares. These include the SSS (Side-Side-Side) postulate, the ASA (Angle-Side-Angle) theorem, and the HL (Hypotenuse-Leg) theorem. These methods rely on different combinations of known side lengths and angles to prove congruency.

Are there any real-world implications of a square not satisfying the SAS postulate?

In most cases, the SAS postulate and the congruency of squares are not relevant in real-world applications. However, in some cases, such as in architecture or engineering, it may be important to accurately determine the congruency of shapes for building structures or designing objects. In these cases, the SAS postulate and other methods of proving congruency may be used to ensure accuracy and avoid errors.

Similar threads

MHB Formula to extend a line in 3d (opposite of midpoint formula)
Replies
2
Views
2K
MHB How Do You Calculate the Slope to Intercept a Moving Point?
Replies
2
Views
2K
If two vertices of a square on the same side AB are A(1,2) and B(2,4)....
Replies
2
Views
2K
Find point on XYZ line with Distance
Replies
2
Views
2K
Coulomb's force - magnitude of the electric force
Replies
11
Views
3K
V=[k(q)/r] + [k(-q)/r] Finding the points where v is equal to zero.
Replies
1
Views
2K
I Understanding the product topology
Replies
9
Views
2K
MATLAB Troubleshooting Best Fit Line and Distance Calculation in MATLAB
Replies
14
Views
3K
Is Min Function a Valid Metric on Cartesian Product Spaces?
Replies
1
Views
2K
How Do You Solve a Kinematics Tennis Ball Problem Using d-v-a-t Formulas?
Replies
1
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top