MHB What is the formula for finding angle theta without accounting for height?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xyz_1965
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angle Theta
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating angle theta (t) using the tangent function, specifically with the equation tan(t) = 324/550. The user initially neglects to account for the height of the person in their calculations, which is crucial for accuracy. The correct approach involves using the formula tan(theta) = (height of tower - height of person) / (distance from the person to the tower). Acknowledging the height of the person is essential for solving similar problems in the future. This highlights the importance of considering all relevant variables in trigonometric calculations.
xyz_1965
Messages
73
Reaction score
0
AngleofElevationEx1a.png.cf.png


Here is my set up.

Let t = theta for short

tan(t) = 324/550

arctan(tan t) = arctan(324/550)

t = arctan(324/550)

Correct thus far?

Note: What does "not to scale" mean in other words?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
$\tan{\theta} = \dfrac{324-1.6}{550}$
 
skeeter said:
$\tan{\theta} = \dfrac{324-1.6}{550}$

What is wrong with my approach?
 
xyz_1965 said:
What is wrong with my approach?

You aren't accounting for the height of the person.
 
MarkFL said:
You aren't accounting for the height of the person.

Ok. I totally forgot about the height of the person.

tan (theta) = (height of tower - height of person)/(distance between person and the base of the tower). This will help me when I face a similar problem again.
 
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