Re: Length and area..
- From: quasi <quasi@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2008 11:05:22 -0500
On Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:19:22 EDT, "G.E. Ivey"
<george.ivey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 5, 2:43 pm, "[Mr.] Lynn Kurtz"If so that would be a very silly question. Any student advanced enough to know the distinction between "dotted" and "solid" lines could trivially do the area. And if they didn't know that, and just calculated the area of the rectangle anyway, they would get the correct answer anyway. What would such a question be testing?
<ku...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2, 0. Your second figure doesn't enclose any areaunless I
misinterpret the meaning of the dotted lines.
I'm pretty sure that what the OP intended was to find
the area of a
rectangle in which the segment on the right side of
the rectangle is
not included in the area. I.e., if you put the origin
of a Cartesian
coordinate system at the lower left corner of the
rectangle with the
+x axis directed along the base of the rectangle,
then the region in
question satisfies 0 <= x < 2 and 0 <= y <= 1.
Dave
Whether the area of a closed rectangular region is affected by the
removal of part of the boundary.
The exercise (clearly very elementary) is presumably intended to show
by example that the concept of "positive measure" depends on the
dimension of the containing space, and hence positive length doesn't
imply positive area.
quasi
.
- References:
- Re: Length and area..
- From: Dave
- Re: Length and area..
- From: G.E. Ivey
- Re: Length and area..
- Prev by Date: Re: Number with maximum...
- Next by Date: Re: Combinatorics question
- Previous by thread: Re: Length and area..
- Next by thread: Re: Length and area..
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
