A way to find this shaded area without calculus?
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
This is a popular problem spreading around. Solve for the shaded reddish/orange area. (more precisely: the area in hex color #FF5600)
$ABCD$ is a square with a side of $10$, $APD$ and $CPD$ are semicircles, and $ADQB$ is a quarter circle. The problem is to find the shaded area $DPQ$.
I was able to solve it with coordinate geometry and calculus, and I verified the exact answer against a numerical calculation on Desmos.
Ultimately the result is 4 terms and not very complicated. So I was wondering: Is there was a way to solve this using trigonometry? Perhaps there is a way to decompose the shapes I am not seeing.
A couple of years ago there was a similar "Find the shaded area" problem for Chinese students. I was able to solve that without calculus, even though it was quite an involved calculation.
Disclosure: I run the YouTube channel MindYourDecisions. I plan to post a video on this topic. I'm okay posting only the calculus solution, but it would be nice to post one using only trigonometry as many have not taken calculus. I will give proper credit to anyone that helps, thanks!
Update: Thanks for everyone's help! I prepared a video for this and presented 3 methods of solving it (the short way like Achille Hui's answer, a slightly longer way like David K and Seyed's answer, and a third way using calculus). I thanked those people in the video on screen, see around 1:30 in this link: https://youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c.
geometry trigonometry area
|
show 4 more comments
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
This is a popular problem spreading around. Solve for the shaded reddish/orange area. (more precisely: the area in hex color #FF5600)
$ABCD$ is a square with a side of $10$, $APD$ and $CPD$ are semicircles, and $ADQB$ is a quarter circle. The problem is to find the shaded area $DPQ$.
I was able to solve it with coordinate geometry and calculus, and I verified the exact answer against a numerical calculation on Desmos.
Ultimately the result is 4 terms and not very complicated. So I was wondering: Is there was a way to solve this using trigonometry? Perhaps there is a way to decompose the shapes I am not seeing.
A couple of years ago there was a similar "Find the shaded area" problem for Chinese students. I was able to solve that without calculus, even though it was quite an involved calculation.
Disclosure: I run the YouTube channel MindYourDecisions. I plan to post a video on this topic. I'm okay posting only the calculus solution, but it would be nice to post one using only trigonometry as many have not taken calculus. I will give proper credit to anyone that helps, thanks!
Update: Thanks for everyone's help! I prepared a video for this and presented 3 methods of solving it (the short way like Achille Hui's answer, a slightly longer way like David K and Seyed's answer, and a third way using calculus). I thanked those people in the video on screen, see around 1:30 in this link: https://youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c.
geometry trigonometry area
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
13
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
1
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
2
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28
|
show 4 more comments
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
up vote
38
down vote
favorite
This is a popular problem spreading around. Solve for the shaded reddish/orange area. (more precisely: the area in hex color #FF5600)
$ABCD$ is a square with a side of $10$, $APD$ and $CPD$ are semicircles, and $ADQB$ is a quarter circle. The problem is to find the shaded area $DPQ$.
I was able to solve it with coordinate geometry and calculus, and I verified the exact answer against a numerical calculation on Desmos.
Ultimately the result is 4 terms and not very complicated. So I was wondering: Is there was a way to solve this using trigonometry? Perhaps there is a way to decompose the shapes I am not seeing.
A couple of years ago there was a similar "Find the shaded area" problem for Chinese students. I was able to solve that without calculus, even though it was quite an involved calculation.
Disclosure: I run the YouTube channel MindYourDecisions. I plan to post a video on this topic. I'm okay posting only the calculus solution, but it would be nice to post one using only trigonometry as many have not taken calculus. I will give proper credit to anyone that helps, thanks!
Update: Thanks for everyone's help! I prepared a video for this and presented 3 methods of solving it (the short way like Achille Hui's answer, a slightly longer way like David K and Seyed's answer, and a third way using calculus). I thanked those people in the video on screen, see around 1:30 in this link: https://youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c.
geometry trigonometry area
This is a popular problem spreading around. Solve for the shaded reddish/orange area. (more precisely: the area in hex color #FF5600)
$ABCD$ is a square with a side of $10$, $APD$ and $CPD$ are semicircles, and $ADQB$ is a quarter circle. The problem is to find the shaded area $DPQ$.
I was able to solve it with coordinate geometry and calculus, and I verified the exact answer against a numerical calculation on Desmos.
Ultimately the result is 4 terms and not very complicated. So I was wondering: Is there was a way to solve this using trigonometry? Perhaps there is a way to decompose the shapes I am not seeing.
A couple of years ago there was a similar "Find the shaded area" problem for Chinese students. I was able to solve that without calculus, even though it was quite an involved calculation.
Disclosure: I run the YouTube channel MindYourDecisions. I plan to post a video on this topic. I'm okay posting only the calculus solution, but it would be nice to post one using only trigonometry as many have not taken calculus. I will give proper credit to anyone that helps, thanks!
Update: Thanks for everyone's help! I prepared a video for this and presented 3 methods of solving it (the short way like Achille Hui's answer, a slightly longer way like David K and Seyed's answer, and a third way using calculus). I thanked those people in the video on screen, see around 1:30 in this link: https://youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c.
geometry trigonometry area
geometry trigonometry area
edited 2 days ago
asked Nov 28 at 4:30
Presh
547516
547516
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
13
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
1
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
2
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28
|
show 4 more comments
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
13
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
1
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
2
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
13
13
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
1
1
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
2
2
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28
|
show 4 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
The area can be simplified to $75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25 approx 9.773570675060455 $.
It come down to finding the area of lens $DP$ and $DQ$ and take difference.
What you need is the area of the lens formed by intersecting two circles, one centered at $(a,0)$ with radius $a$, another centered on $(0,b)$ with radius $b$. It is given by the expression.
$$begin{align}Delta(a,b)
stackrel{def}{=} & overbrace{a^2tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right)}^{I} + overbrace{b^2tan^{-1}left(frac{a}{b}right)}^{II} - ab\
= & (a^2-b^2) tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right) + frac{pi}{2} b^2 - ab
end{align}
$$
In above expression,
$I$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(a,0)$ (as a convex hull).
$II$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(0,b)$ (as a convex hull).
$ab$ is area of union of these two sectors, a right-angled kite with sides $a$ and $b$.
Apply this to problem at hand, we get
$$begin{align}verb/Area/(DPQ)
&= verb/Area/({rm lens}(DQ)) - verb/Area/({rm lens}(DP))\[5pt]
&= Delta(10,5) - Delta(5,5)\
&= left((10^2-5^2)tan^{-1}left(frac12right) + 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5cdot 10right)
- left( 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5^2right)\
&= 75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25
end{align}
$$
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
36
down vote
The area is equal to difference between the area of two lenses.
It is easy to find the area of lenses like the one I did in this question before: How to find the shaded area
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
Let $E$ be the midpoint of the edge $CD.$
Then $triangle ADE$ and $triangle AQE$ are congruent right triangles,
and we find that $angle DAQ = 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
Moreover, $angle CEQ = angle DAQ$ and therefore
$angle DEQ = pi - 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
And of course each of the arcs from $D$ to $P$ has angle $fracpi2.$
Knowing the radius and angle of an arc you can find the area of the circular segment bounded by the arc and the chord between the arc's endpoints without calculus.
The area of the red region is the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $Q,$
minus the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $P.$
Note that one of the arcs from $D$ to $Q$ has radius $10$, but the other three arcs all have radius $5.$
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
For fun, I did the old chemist trick of printing out the diagram, cutting it apart, then weighing the pieces on a milligram scale. No calculus!
The total diagram weighed 720 mg, and the sliver weighed 77 mg. Then, $frac{77,mathrm{mg}}{720,mathrm{mg}}cdot 10^2,mathrm{cm}^2approx 10.7,mathrm{cm}^2$ is the estimated area. This is about $9.5%$ greater than the analytical solution. Not that good, but still not bad for something quick.
One source of error was the extra weight of the toner on the sliver, which printed out rather dark gray. If I knew where my compasses were, I could make a more accurate construction.
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The complete solution can be watched here : https://youtu.be/4Yrk-UNfAis
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I think this is a good step to find the result without any coordinates, while it is actually not the full solution.
You have six non intersecting subareas, say:
- S1 is DPD
- S2 is DQPD
- S3 is DCQD
- S4 is CBQC
- S5 is BAPQD
- S6 is ADPA
Also say that L is the length of the square.
You can at least state these equations :
- S1+S2+S3+S4+S5+S6 = $L^2$
- S1+S6 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S1+S2+S5+S6 = $frac{pi L^2}{4}$
- S1+S2+S3 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S3+S4 = $frac{(2L)^2-pi L^2}{4}$
- S2+S5 = $frac{pi L^2-pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2}{4}$
Alas these are not independent, but I'm pretty sure that you can find six independent ones like this.
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
add a comment |
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
The area can be simplified to $75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25 approx 9.773570675060455 $.
It come down to finding the area of lens $DP$ and $DQ$ and take difference.
What you need is the area of the lens formed by intersecting two circles, one centered at $(a,0)$ with radius $a$, another centered on $(0,b)$ with radius $b$. It is given by the expression.
$$begin{align}Delta(a,b)
stackrel{def}{=} & overbrace{a^2tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right)}^{I} + overbrace{b^2tan^{-1}left(frac{a}{b}right)}^{II} - ab\
= & (a^2-b^2) tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right) + frac{pi}{2} b^2 - ab
end{align}
$$
In above expression,
$I$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(a,0)$ (as a convex hull).
$II$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(0,b)$ (as a convex hull).
$ab$ is area of union of these two sectors, a right-angled kite with sides $a$ and $b$.
Apply this to problem at hand, we get
$$begin{align}verb/Area/(DPQ)
&= verb/Area/({rm lens}(DQ)) - verb/Area/({rm lens}(DP))\[5pt]
&= Delta(10,5) - Delta(5,5)\
&= left((10^2-5^2)tan^{-1}left(frac12right) + 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5cdot 10right)
- left( 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5^2right)\
&= 75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25
end{align}
$$
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
The area can be simplified to $75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25 approx 9.773570675060455 $.
It come down to finding the area of lens $DP$ and $DQ$ and take difference.
What you need is the area of the lens formed by intersecting two circles, one centered at $(a,0)$ with radius $a$, another centered on $(0,b)$ with radius $b$. It is given by the expression.
$$begin{align}Delta(a,b)
stackrel{def}{=} & overbrace{a^2tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right)}^{I} + overbrace{b^2tan^{-1}left(frac{a}{b}right)}^{II} - ab\
= & (a^2-b^2) tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right) + frac{pi}{2} b^2 - ab
end{align}
$$
In above expression,
$I$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(a,0)$ (as a convex hull).
$II$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(0,b)$ (as a convex hull).
$ab$ is area of union of these two sectors, a right-angled kite with sides $a$ and $b$.
Apply this to problem at hand, we get
$$begin{align}verb/Area/(DPQ)
&= verb/Area/({rm lens}(DQ)) - verb/Area/({rm lens}(DP))\[5pt]
&= Delta(10,5) - Delta(5,5)\
&= left((10^2-5^2)tan^{-1}left(frac12right) + 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5cdot 10right)
- left( 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5^2right)\
&= 75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25
end{align}
$$
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
The area can be simplified to $75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25 approx 9.773570675060455 $.
It come down to finding the area of lens $DP$ and $DQ$ and take difference.
What you need is the area of the lens formed by intersecting two circles, one centered at $(a,0)$ with radius $a$, another centered on $(0,b)$ with radius $b$. It is given by the expression.
$$begin{align}Delta(a,b)
stackrel{def}{=} & overbrace{a^2tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right)}^{I} + overbrace{b^2tan^{-1}left(frac{a}{b}right)}^{II} - ab\
= & (a^2-b^2) tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right) + frac{pi}{2} b^2 - ab
end{align}
$$
In above expression,
$I$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(a,0)$ (as a convex hull).
$II$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(0,b)$ (as a convex hull).
$ab$ is area of union of these two sectors, a right-angled kite with sides $a$ and $b$.
Apply this to problem at hand, we get
$$begin{align}verb/Area/(DPQ)
&= verb/Area/({rm lens}(DQ)) - verb/Area/({rm lens}(DP))\[5pt]
&= Delta(10,5) - Delta(5,5)\
&= left((10^2-5^2)tan^{-1}left(frac12right) + 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5cdot 10right)
- left( 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5^2right)\
&= 75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25
end{align}
$$
The area can be simplified to $75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25 approx 9.773570675060455 $.
It come down to finding the area of lens $DP$ and $DQ$ and take difference.
What you need is the area of the lens formed by intersecting two circles, one centered at $(a,0)$ with radius $a$, another centered on $(0,b)$ with radius $b$. It is given by the expression.
$$begin{align}Delta(a,b)
stackrel{def}{=} & overbrace{a^2tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right)}^{I} + overbrace{b^2tan^{-1}left(frac{a}{b}right)}^{II} - ab\
= & (a^2-b^2) tan^{-1}left(frac{b}{a}right) + frac{pi}{2} b^2 - ab
end{align}
$$
In above expression,
$I$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(a,0)$ (as a convex hull).
$II$ is area of the circular sector span by the lens at $(0,b)$ (as a convex hull).
$ab$ is area of union of these two sectors, a right-angled kite with sides $a$ and $b$.
Apply this to problem at hand, we get
$$begin{align}verb/Area/(DPQ)
&= verb/Area/({rm lens}(DQ)) - verb/Area/({rm lens}(DP))\[5pt]
&= Delta(10,5) - Delta(5,5)\
&= left((10^2-5^2)tan^{-1}left(frac12right) + 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5cdot 10right)
- left( 5^2cdotfrac{pi}{2} - 5^2right)\
&= 75tan^{-1}left(frac12right) - 25
end{align}
$$
edited Nov 28 at 6:26
answered Nov 28 at 5:28
achille hui
94.7k5129254
94.7k5129254
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
add a comment |
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
Incredible! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
But, how did you obtained that formula for the lenses ? If you used calculus to obtain it, than I think this still wouldn't be an answer to this question. If not, it would be really good if you could give us some reference for it.
– onurcanbektas
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
@onurcanbektas the area of a lens is the sum of area of two circular sector minus that of a right angled kite. The argument is essentially the one presented in Presh's youtube video.
– achille hui
yesterday
add a comment |
up vote
36
down vote
The area is equal to difference between the area of two lenses.
It is easy to find the area of lenses like the one I did in this question before: How to find the shaded area
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
36
down vote
The area is equal to difference between the area of two lenses.
It is easy to find the area of lenses like the one I did in this question before: How to find the shaded area
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
36
down vote
up vote
36
down vote
The area is equal to difference between the area of two lenses.
It is easy to find the area of lenses like the one I did in this question before: How to find the shaded area
The area is equal to difference between the area of two lenses.
It is easy to find the area of lenses like the one I did in this question before: How to find the shaded area
edited Nov 28 at 14:12
answered Nov 28 at 12:53
Seyed
6,63341423
6,63341423
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
add a comment |
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
The graphic helps a lot, thanks! I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:20
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
Let $E$ be the midpoint of the edge $CD.$
Then $triangle ADE$ and $triangle AQE$ are congruent right triangles,
and we find that $angle DAQ = 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
Moreover, $angle CEQ = angle DAQ$ and therefore
$angle DEQ = pi - 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
And of course each of the arcs from $D$ to $P$ has angle $fracpi2.$
Knowing the radius and angle of an arc you can find the area of the circular segment bounded by the arc and the chord between the arc's endpoints without calculus.
The area of the red region is the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $Q,$
minus the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $P.$
Note that one of the arcs from $D$ to $Q$ has radius $10$, but the other three arcs all have radius $5.$
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
Let $E$ be the midpoint of the edge $CD.$
Then $triangle ADE$ and $triangle AQE$ are congruent right triangles,
and we find that $angle DAQ = 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
Moreover, $angle CEQ = angle DAQ$ and therefore
$angle DEQ = pi - 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
And of course each of the arcs from $D$ to $P$ has angle $fracpi2.$
Knowing the radius and angle of an arc you can find the area of the circular segment bounded by the arc and the chord between the arc's endpoints without calculus.
The area of the red region is the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $Q,$
minus the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $P.$
Note that one of the arcs from $D$ to $Q$ has radius $10$, but the other three arcs all have radius $5.$
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
add a comment |
up vote
8
down vote
up vote
8
down vote
Let $E$ be the midpoint of the edge $CD.$
Then $triangle ADE$ and $triangle AQE$ are congruent right triangles,
and we find that $angle DAQ = 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
Moreover, $angle CEQ = angle DAQ$ and therefore
$angle DEQ = pi - 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
And of course each of the arcs from $D$ to $P$ has angle $fracpi2.$
Knowing the radius and angle of an arc you can find the area of the circular segment bounded by the arc and the chord between the arc's endpoints without calculus.
The area of the red region is the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $Q,$
minus the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $P.$
Note that one of the arcs from $D$ to $Q$ has radius $10$, but the other three arcs all have radius $5.$
Let $E$ be the midpoint of the edge $CD.$
Then $triangle ADE$ and $triangle AQE$ are congruent right triangles,
and we find that $angle DAQ = 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
Moreover, $angle CEQ = angle DAQ$ and therefore
$angle DEQ = pi - 2arctanleft(frac12right).$
And of course each of the arcs from $D$ to $P$ has angle $fracpi2.$
Knowing the radius and angle of an arc you can find the area of the circular segment bounded by the arc and the chord between the arc's endpoints without calculus.
The area of the red region is the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $Q,$
minus the sum of the areas of the segments bounded by the arcs between $D$ and $P.$
Note that one of the arcs from $D$ to $Q$ has radius $10$, but the other three arcs all have radius $5.$
answered Nov 28 at 5:03
David K
51.8k340114
51.8k340114
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
add a comment |
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
Yours was the first answer I read that helped. I did prepare a video and credited your user name (and others who helped) at around 1:30, see: youtu.be/cPNdvdYn05c?t=90.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:21
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
For fun, I did the old chemist trick of printing out the diagram, cutting it apart, then weighing the pieces on a milligram scale. No calculus!
The total diagram weighed 720 mg, and the sliver weighed 77 mg. Then, $frac{77,mathrm{mg}}{720,mathrm{mg}}cdot 10^2,mathrm{cm}^2approx 10.7,mathrm{cm}^2$ is the estimated area. This is about $9.5%$ greater than the analytical solution. Not that good, but still not bad for something quick.
One source of error was the extra weight of the toner on the sliver, which printed out rather dark gray. If I knew where my compasses were, I could make a more accurate construction.
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
For fun, I did the old chemist trick of printing out the diagram, cutting it apart, then weighing the pieces on a milligram scale. No calculus!
The total diagram weighed 720 mg, and the sliver weighed 77 mg. Then, $frac{77,mathrm{mg}}{720,mathrm{mg}}cdot 10^2,mathrm{cm}^2approx 10.7,mathrm{cm}^2$ is the estimated area. This is about $9.5%$ greater than the analytical solution. Not that good, but still not bad for something quick.
One source of error was the extra weight of the toner on the sliver, which printed out rather dark gray. If I knew where my compasses were, I could make a more accurate construction.
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
For fun, I did the old chemist trick of printing out the diagram, cutting it apart, then weighing the pieces on a milligram scale. No calculus!
The total diagram weighed 720 mg, and the sliver weighed 77 mg. Then, $frac{77,mathrm{mg}}{720,mathrm{mg}}cdot 10^2,mathrm{cm}^2approx 10.7,mathrm{cm}^2$ is the estimated area. This is about $9.5%$ greater than the analytical solution. Not that good, but still not bad for something quick.
One source of error was the extra weight of the toner on the sliver, which printed out rather dark gray. If I knew where my compasses were, I could make a more accurate construction.
For fun, I did the old chemist trick of printing out the diagram, cutting it apart, then weighing the pieces on a milligram scale. No calculus!
The total diagram weighed 720 mg, and the sliver weighed 77 mg. Then, $frac{77,mathrm{mg}}{720,mathrm{mg}}cdot 10^2,mathrm{cm}^2approx 10.7,mathrm{cm}^2$ is the estimated area. This is about $9.5%$ greater than the analytical solution. Not that good, but still not bad for something quick.
One source of error was the extra weight of the toner on the sliver, which printed out rather dark gray. If I knew where my compasses were, I could make a more accurate construction.
answered Nov 29 at 6:41
Kyle Miller
7,937827
7,937827
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
add a comment |
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
Why couldn't we do fun stuff like that in math class? Thanks, this method would be fun to present in a video sometime for a challenging integral.
– Presh
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The complete solution can be watched here : https://youtu.be/4Yrk-UNfAis
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
The complete solution can be watched here : https://youtu.be/4Yrk-UNfAis
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
The complete solution can be watched here : https://youtu.be/4Yrk-UNfAis
The complete solution can be watched here : https://youtu.be/4Yrk-UNfAis
answered Nov 29 at 23:00
user9077
854412
854412
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
add a comment |
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
1
1
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
I watched this only after I prepared my video. I like the idea of using similar triangles to figure out the lengths of the kite's diagonals. That didn't make it into my video but it is a useful principle.
– Presh
Dec 3 at 4:25
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I think this is a good step to find the result without any coordinates, while it is actually not the full solution.
You have six non intersecting subareas, say:
- S1 is DPD
- S2 is DQPD
- S3 is DCQD
- S4 is CBQC
- S5 is BAPQD
- S6 is ADPA
Also say that L is the length of the square.
You can at least state these equations :
- S1+S2+S3+S4+S5+S6 = $L^2$
- S1+S6 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S1+S2+S5+S6 = $frac{pi L^2}{4}$
- S1+S2+S3 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S3+S4 = $frac{(2L)^2-pi L^2}{4}$
- S2+S5 = $frac{pi L^2-pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2}{4}$
Alas these are not independent, but I'm pretty sure that you can find six independent ones like this.
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
I think this is a good step to find the result without any coordinates, while it is actually not the full solution.
You have six non intersecting subareas, say:
- S1 is DPD
- S2 is DQPD
- S3 is DCQD
- S4 is CBQC
- S5 is BAPQD
- S6 is ADPA
Also say that L is the length of the square.
You can at least state these equations :
- S1+S2+S3+S4+S5+S6 = $L^2$
- S1+S6 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S1+S2+S5+S6 = $frac{pi L^2}{4}$
- S1+S2+S3 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S3+S4 = $frac{(2L)^2-pi L^2}{4}$
- S2+S5 = $frac{pi L^2-pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2}{4}$
Alas these are not independent, but I'm pretty sure that you can find six independent ones like this.
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
I think this is a good step to find the result without any coordinates, while it is actually not the full solution.
You have six non intersecting subareas, say:
- S1 is DPD
- S2 is DQPD
- S3 is DCQD
- S4 is CBQC
- S5 is BAPQD
- S6 is ADPA
Also say that L is the length of the square.
You can at least state these equations :
- S1+S2+S3+S4+S5+S6 = $L^2$
- S1+S6 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S1+S2+S5+S6 = $frac{pi L^2}{4}$
- S1+S2+S3 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S3+S4 = $frac{(2L)^2-pi L^2}{4}$
- S2+S5 = $frac{pi L^2-pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2}{4}$
Alas these are not independent, but I'm pretty sure that you can find six independent ones like this.
I think this is a good step to find the result without any coordinates, while it is actually not the full solution.
You have six non intersecting subareas, say:
- S1 is DPD
- S2 is DQPD
- S3 is DCQD
- S4 is CBQC
- S5 is BAPQD
- S6 is ADPA
Also say that L is the length of the square.
You can at least state these equations :
- S1+S2+S3+S4+S5+S6 = $L^2$
- S1+S6 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S1+S2+S5+S6 = $frac{pi L^2}{4}$
- S1+S2+S3 = $frac{1}{2}pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2$
- S3+S4 = $frac{(2L)^2-pi L^2}{4}$
- S2+S5 = $frac{pi L^2-pileft(frac{L}{2}right)^2}{4}$
Alas these are not independent, but I'm pretty sure that you can find six independent ones like this.
answered Nov 28 at 10:00
Jean-Baptiste Yunès
1673
1673
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
add a comment |
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
This approach cannot possibly work unless you find an equation involving $tan^{-1}(1/2)$.
– Rahul
Dec 3 at 4:17
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3016718%2fa-way-to-find-this-shaded-area-without-calculus%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Out of curiosity, is there a particular "audience" that this question is aimed at? Given the relatively simple formulation of the question, I almost feel like that using trig and calculus (while sufficient) might be overkill. ... though obviously I'm getting nowhere using more elementary techniques, at least at the moment, so I could easily be wrong.
– Eevee Trainer
Nov 28 at 4:40
You can try proving no solution exists from just the square, half-square, semicircle and quartercircle areas (use linear algebra). So if there's an elementary method then you'll need to draw extra lines.
– YiFan
Nov 28 at 4:41
13
The shaded area in orange? Am I color blind?
– Mason
Nov 28 at 4:54
1
Thanks for the early responses! I will work on them to upvote and accept an answer. To Eevee--you are right, usually these should be simple problems. But there was one weird, cruel meme that required elliptic curves! (See quora.com/…)
– Presh
Nov 28 at 8:53
2
The question is wrong. Those are not semi-circles, otherwise they would intersect at the centre of the square!
– user21820
Nov 28 at 9:28