Complete the Growing Rectangles activity on pages 237 – 238.
Share your questions, thoughts, sketches, process, mistakes, or
solutions in the discussion board.
We've updated LINCS Courses.
Please see the Course Guide for updated information on using the site.
Comments
Hi all,
I like the growing rectangles problem because of how open it is. I explored rectangles, triangles, pyramids, cones and spheres. It seems to me that increasing 2-dimensional figure by a scale factor of 2 results in an area 4 times the original.
Here's a 4x5 rectangle scaled up by a factor of 2 to be a 8x10 rectangle:
---> scaled up by factor of 2 --->
If the scale factor is k, then the area of the scaled-up figure will be k2 times bigger than the original figure.
Increasing a 3-dimensional figure by a scale factor of 2 results in a volume 8 times the original. If the scale factor is k, then the volume of the scaled-up figure will be k3 times bigger than the original figure.
This makes sense if we consider that multiplying two dimensions (length and width) times a scale factor k results in (k * length) * (k * width) or k2 * length * width. Multiplying three dimensions (length, width and height) times a scale factor k results in (k * length) * (k * width) * (k * height) or k3 * length * width * height. I haven't tried enough plane figures and solids to know if these generalizations are always true, but it seems like they would be. Even if we have to multiply by 1/3 to get the volume of a pyramid, the scale factor is still going to be cubed in the volume formula.
Eric,
I haven’t played around with the 3D figures yet, but I got similar results to what you did when increasing a 2-dimensional figure by a scale factor of 2 – the area would be 4 times that of the original. Also, when increasing by a scale factor of 3 – the area would be 9 times that of the original. At least that’s what I got with what I’ve done so far.
I say this because I was looking for other connections that seemed to work sometimes, but not all the time. For example, if a rectangle has a width of 2 and you increase that rectangle by a scale factor of 2, the enlarged rectangle will have a length that is equal to the area of the smaller rectangle. But that only seems to work with 2. I played with other numbers and didn’t get similar results but maybe I need to expand my research. Will it only work with 2?
Then, I tried it with triangles. I started with a triangle that had a height of 2 and a base of 3 and increased it by a scale factor of 2. I did not find the same connection there that I did with the rectangle.
After that, I played with an isosceles triangle with legs that have a length of 4 and increased that by a scale factor of 2. I found that the legs of the enlarged triangle (8) were equal to the area of the original triangle! However, if I scaled the original triangle down or the enlarged triangle up, it didn’t work. So again, will this only work if the legs of an isosceles triangle are 4?
- The ramblings of Patricia
Hi all,
Our math circle looked at Growing Rectangles yesterday. Here's the board work and a link to a writeup of the meeting.
-Eric
http://nyccami.org/growing-rectangles/