Can we compute the area of a quadrilateral with one right angle when we only know the lengths of any three sides?Maximize the Area of a Quadrilateral given Three SidesA simple(?) Analytical Geometry Question (Ellipse)The perimeter of the rectangle is $20$, diagonal is $8$ and side is $x$. Show that $x^2-10x+18=0$Solving right triangle given the area and one angleCan one deduce whether a given quantity is possible as the area of a triangle when supplied with the length of two of its sides?Prove that the midpoints of the sides of a quadrilateral lie on a circle if and only if the quadrilateral is orthodiagonal.Given three points, how can I tell if the angle is acute without using trigonometric functions?Area of a concave quadrilateralUnknown internal angles of a quadrilateral where its area and side lengths are knownSimilar quadrilateral to a given one with vertices of the same color

Detention in 1997

What are some good books on Machine Learning and AI like Krugman, Wells and Graddy's "Essentials of Economics"

What does “the session was packed” mean in this context?

Do scales need to be in alphabetical order?

What killed these X2 caps?

How do I deal with an unproductive colleague in a small company?

Solving a recurrence relation (poker chips)

Why was the shrinking from 8″ made only to 5.25″ and not smaller (4″ or less)?

How to prevent "they're falling in love" trope

What about the virus in 12 Monkeys?

Personal Teleportation: From Rags to Riches

Cursor Replacement for Newbies

Is it possible to create a QR code using text?

How can I deal with my CEO asking me to hire someone with a higher salary than me, a co-founder?

Bullying boss launched a smear campaign and made me unemployable

Why no variance term in Bayesian logistic regression?

Is "remove commented out code" correct English?

Is it inappropriate for a student to attend their mentor's dissertation defense?

One verb to replace 'be a member of' a club

Why is this clock signal connected to a capacitor to gnd?

How did the Super Star Destroyer Executor get destroyed exactly?

How to show a landlord what we have in savings?

Plagiarism or not?

I would say: "You are another teacher", but she is a woman and I am a man



Can we compute the area of a quadrilateral with one right angle when we only know the lengths of any three sides?


Maximize the Area of a Quadrilateral given Three SidesA simple(?) Analytical Geometry Question (Ellipse)The perimeter of the rectangle is $20$, diagonal is $8$ and side is $x$. Show that $x^2-10x+18=0$Solving right triangle given the area and one angleCan one deduce whether a given quantity is possible as the area of a triangle when supplied with the length of two of its sides?Prove that the midpoints of the sides of a quadrilateral lie on a circle if and only if the quadrilateral is orthodiagonal.Given three points, how can I tell if the angle is acute without using trigonometric functions?Area of a concave quadrilateralUnknown internal angles of a quadrilateral where its area and side lengths are knownSimilar quadrilateral to a given one with vertices of the same color













19












$begingroup$


I took an IQ test for fun recently, but I take issue with the answer to one of the questions. Here's the question:



enter image description here



My issue is that the explanation assumes angle DC is a right angle. Given that assumption, I can see the quadrilateral is indeed a rectangle and a right triangle and can follow their explanation. However, (from what I remember my high school geometry teacher telling me) even though an angle looks like a right angle, it shouldn't be assumed unless it is explicitly stated or you can prove it. To explain what I mean, if DC isn't a right angle and we exacerbated that difference, it would look like the following:



enter image description here



Thus, even being given A, B, C and D it seems like the area could not be calculated.



So my question is twofold:



  1. Is my criticism valid or am I just being too proud because I got a question wrong?

  2. Given my interpretation, DC is not a right angle, can this problem be solved?









share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 11




    $begingroup$
    Not that angle, the one below it.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    " even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
    $endgroup$
    – J.G.
    8 hours ago















19












$begingroup$


I took an IQ test for fun recently, but I take issue with the answer to one of the questions. Here's the question:



enter image description here



My issue is that the explanation assumes angle DC is a right angle. Given that assumption, I can see the quadrilateral is indeed a rectangle and a right triangle and can follow their explanation. However, (from what I remember my high school geometry teacher telling me) even though an angle looks like a right angle, it shouldn't be assumed unless it is explicitly stated or you can prove it. To explain what I mean, if DC isn't a right angle and we exacerbated that difference, it would look like the following:



enter image description here



Thus, even being given A, B, C and D it seems like the area could not be calculated.



So my question is twofold:



  1. Is my criticism valid or am I just being too proud because I got a question wrong?

  2. Given my interpretation, DC is not a right angle, can this problem be solved?









share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 11




    $begingroup$
    Not that angle, the one below it.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    " even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
    $endgroup$
    – J.G.
    8 hours ago













19












19








19


1



$begingroup$


I took an IQ test for fun recently, but I take issue with the answer to one of the questions. Here's the question:



enter image description here



My issue is that the explanation assumes angle DC is a right angle. Given that assumption, I can see the quadrilateral is indeed a rectangle and a right triangle and can follow their explanation. However, (from what I remember my high school geometry teacher telling me) even though an angle looks like a right angle, it shouldn't be assumed unless it is explicitly stated or you can prove it. To explain what I mean, if DC isn't a right angle and we exacerbated that difference, it would look like the following:



enter image description here



Thus, even being given A, B, C and D it seems like the area could not be calculated.



So my question is twofold:



  1. Is my criticism valid or am I just being too proud because I got a question wrong?

  2. Given my interpretation, DC is not a right angle, can this problem be solved?









share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




I took an IQ test for fun recently, but I take issue with the answer to one of the questions. Here's the question:



enter image description here



My issue is that the explanation assumes angle DC is a right angle. Given that assumption, I can see the quadrilateral is indeed a rectangle and a right triangle and can follow their explanation. However, (from what I remember my high school geometry teacher telling me) even though an angle looks like a right angle, it shouldn't be assumed unless it is explicitly stated or you can prove it. To explain what I mean, if DC isn't a right angle and we exacerbated that difference, it would look like the following:



enter image description here



Thus, even being given A, B, C and D it seems like the area could not be calculated.



So my question is twofold:



  1. Is my criticism valid or am I just being too proud because I got a question wrong?

  2. Given my interpretation, DC is not a right angle, can this problem be solved?






geometry






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 18 hours ago









Discrete lizard

14010




14010






New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









Jack O.Jack O.

965




965




New contributor




Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Jack O. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 11




    $begingroup$
    Not that angle, the one below it.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    " even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
    $endgroup$
    – J.G.
    8 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 11




    $begingroup$
    Not that angle, the one below it.
    $endgroup$
    – Robert Israel
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    " even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
    $endgroup$
    – fleablood
    yesterday






  • 5




    $begingroup$
    Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
    $endgroup$
    – J.G.
    8 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
yesterday




$begingroup$
You know it is a right angle because it has a large "90" on it. Now we can argue they never said why it has a "90" on it and as I am a nitpick I would agree with you... but... I think you and I would lose in any court.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
yesterday




11




11




$begingroup$
Not that angle, the one below it.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
yesterday




$begingroup$
Not that angle, the one below it.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
yesterday




2




2




$begingroup$
" even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
yesterday




$begingroup$
" even though an angle looks like an angle, it shouldn't be assumed" but it doesn't even look like a right angle.
$endgroup$
– fleablood
yesterday




5




5




$begingroup$
Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
$endgroup$
– J.G.
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
Where did you find that test? Online IQ tests are generally untrustworthy even before we get to this quadrilateral problem. Many don't even bother ending in an IQ estimate.
$endgroup$
– J.G.
8 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















21












$begingroup$

You are right. The provided explanation is nonsensical. $DC$ cannot be assumed to be a right angle.



However, if you don't make that assumption, and take $BC$ as the only given right angle, the correct answer is "All four sides must be known."



The quadrilateral can be decomposed into two non-overlapping triangles. The first is a right angled triangle formed by sides $B$, $C$ and a hypotenuse, and its area is easy to determine. You can use Pythagoras' Theorem to find the hypotenuse of that right triangle formed by sides $B$ and $C$. That hypotenuse, together with sides $A$ and $D$ forms the other triangle. Its area can be computed using Heron's formula. Just sum the areas.



Note that I'm still making a tacit assumption that this is a convex quadrilateral. A concave quadrilateral is possible with the angle $AD$ being reflex, which is seemingly not representative of the diagram given, but is a possibility when one only has the information of a single right angle and four given sides. In the case of a concave quadrilateral, the area calculation that I detailed above would not be correct.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$








  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Perfect, thank you!
    $endgroup$
    – Jack O.
    yesterday










  • $begingroup$
    You're welcome.
    $endgroup$
    – Deepak
    yesterday






  • 2




    $begingroup$
    +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    17 hours ago






  • 10




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    17 hours ago






  • 4




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    16 hours ago


















14












$begingroup$

You are correct that the given solution is wrong. Worse still, even if you know that the angles between BC and CD are both right-angles, the purported answer is still wrong! This is because if you're given the lengths of A,B,C, it still does not uniquely determine D because we are not told that the angle between AB is less than $90°$.



In general, it is not enough even if you have all four side lengths. For example, consider convex quadrilateral $PQRS$ such that $PQ = 6$ and $QR = 9$ and $RS = 7$ and $SP = 8$. It is possible that $P,R$ are slightly less than $15$ apart, making $PQRS$ a very skinny quadrilateral whose area can be made arbitrarily close to zero. Alternatively, moving $P,R$ to a distance of $10$ makes $PQRS$ rather square-like with area clearly more than $48$. Bretschneider's formula gives the area for an arbitrary quadrilateral, and you can see from it as well that fixing the side lengths is not enough to determine the area, since it also varies with the sum of two opposite angles.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$




















    9












    $begingroup$

    You are right: there is absolutely no indication that angle $DC$ is a right angle. If they wanted you to assume it was a right angle, they should have indicated that with another $90$. It really doesn't even look like a right angle (somebody had the bright idea of trying to render the picture in perspective, but we don't even know where the horizon is supposed to be).






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
      $endgroup$
      – Jack O.
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
      $endgroup$
      – Deepak
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
      $endgroup$
      – fleablood
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
      $endgroup$
      – user21820
      15 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
      $endgroup$
      – Acccumulation
      11 hours ago











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );






    Jack O. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3172745%2fcan-we-compute-the-area-of-a-quadrilateral-with-one-right-angle-when-we-only-kno%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    21












    $begingroup$

    You are right. The provided explanation is nonsensical. $DC$ cannot be assumed to be a right angle.



    However, if you don't make that assumption, and take $BC$ as the only given right angle, the correct answer is "All four sides must be known."



    The quadrilateral can be decomposed into two non-overlapping triangles. The first is a right angled triangle formed by sides $B$, $C$ and a hypotenuse, and its area is easy to determine. You can use Pythagoras' Theorem to find the hypotenuse of that right triangle formed by sides $B$ and $C$. That hypotenuse, together with sides $A$ and $D$ forms the other triangle. Its area can be computed using Heron's formula. Just sum the areas.



    Note that I'm still making a tacit assumption that this is a convex quadrilateral. A concave quadrilateral is possible with the angle $AD$ being reflex, which is seemingly not representative of the diagram given, but is a possibility when one only has the information of a single right angle and four given sides. In the case of a concave quadrilateral, the area calculation that I detailed above would not be correct.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Perfect, thank you!
      $endgroup$
      – Jack O.
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      You're welcome.
      $endgroup$
      – Deepak
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
      $endgroup$
      – slebetman
      17 hours ago






    • 10




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      17 hours ago






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      16 hours ago















    21












    $begingroup$

    You are right. The provided explanation is nonsensical. $DC$ cannot be assumed to be a right angle.



    However, if you don't make that assumption, and take $BC$ as the only given right angle, the correct answer is "All four sides must be known."



    The quadrilateral can be decomposed into two non-overlapping triangles. The first is a right angled triangle formed by sides $B$, $C$ and a hypotenuse, and its area is easy to determine. You can use Pythagoras' Theorem to find the hypotenuse of that right triangle formed by sides $B$ and $C$. That hypotenuse, together with sides $A$ and $D$ forms the other triangle. Its area can be computed using Heron's formula. Just sum the areas.



    Note that I'm still making a tacit assumption that this is a convex quadrilateral. A concave quadrilateral is possible with the angle $AD$ being reflex, which is seemingly not representative of the diagram given, but is a possibility when one only has the information of a single right angle and four given sides. In the case of a concave quadrilateral, the area calculation that I detailed above would not be correct.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$








    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Perfect, thank you!
      $endgroup$
      – Jack O.
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      You're welcome.
      $endgroup$
      – Deepak
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
      $endgroup$
      – slebetman
      17 hours ago






    • 10




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      17 hours ago






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      16 hours ago













    21












    21








    21





    $begingroup$

    You are right. The provided explanation is nonsensical. $DC$ cannot be assumed to be a right angle.



    However, if you don't make that assumption, and take $BC$ as the only given right angle, the correct answer is "All four sides must be known."



    The quadrilateral can be decomposed into two non-overlapping triangles. The first is a right angled triangle formed by sides $B$, $C$ and a hypotenuse, and its area is easy to determine. You can use Pythagoras' Theorem to find the hypotenuse of that right triangle formed by sides $B$ and $C$. That hypotenuse, together with sides $A$ and $D$ forms the other triangle. Its area can be computed using Heron's formula. Just sum the areas.



    Note that I'm still making a tacit assumption that this is a convex quadrilateral. A concave quadrilateral is possible with the angle $AD$ being reflex, which is seemingly not representative of the diagram given, but is a possibility when one only has the information of a single right angle and four given sides. In the case of a concave quadrilateral, the area calculation that I detailed above would not be correct.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    You are right. The provided explanation is nonsensical. $DC$ cannot be assumed to be a right angle.



    However, if you don't make that assumption, and take $BC$ as the only given right angle, the correct answer is "All four sides must be known."



    The quadrilateral can be decomposed into two non-overlapping triangles. The first is a right angled triangle formed by sides $B$, $C$ and a hypotenuse, and its area is easy to determine. You can use Pythagoras' Theorem to find the hypotenuse of that right triangle formed by sides $B$ and $C$. That hypotenuse, together with sides $A$ and $D$ forms the other triangle. Its area can be computed using Heron's formula. Just sum the areas.



    Note that I'm still making a tacit assumption that this is a convex quadrilateral. A concave quadrilateral is possible with the angle $AD$ being reflex, which is seemingly not representative of the diagram given, but is a possibility when one only has the information of a single right angle and four given sides. In the case of a concave quadrilateral, the area calculation that I detailed above would not be correct.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited 16 hours ago

























    answered yesterday









    DeepakDeepak

    17.9k11540




    17.9k11540







    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Perfect, thank you!
      $endgroup$
      – Jack O.
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      You're welcome.
      $endgroup$
      – Deepak
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
      $endgroup$
      – slebetman
      17 hours ago






    • 10




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      17 hours ago






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      16 hours ago












    • 1




      $begingroup$
      Perfect, thank you!
      $endgroup$
      – Jack O.
      yesterday










    • $begingroup$
      You're welcome.
      $endgroup$
      – Deepak
      yesterday






    • 2




      $begingroup$
      +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
      $endgroup$
      – slebetman
      17 hours ago






    • 10




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      17 hours ago






    • 4




      $begingroup$
      @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
      $endgroup$
      – David Z
      16 hours ago







    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    Perfect, thank you!
    $endgroup$
    – Jack O.
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    Perfect, thank you!
    $endgroup$
    – Jack O.
    yesterday












    $begingroup$
    You're welcome.
    $endgroup$
    – Deepak
    yesterday




    $begingroup$
    You're welcome.
    $endgroup$
    – Deepak
    yesterday




    2




    2




    $begingroup$
    +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    17 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    +1 for Heron's formula - I learned something new today
    $endgroup$
    – slebetman
    17 hours ago




    10




    10




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    17 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak No, that's not correct. I took some time to double check. For example, see this image representing two quadrilaterals, both satisfying the conditions in the problem, both with the same side lengths, but having different areas - one is strictly smaller than the other.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    17 hours ago




    4




    4




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    16 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    @Deepak Yes, that was exactly my point, that you can have a concave and convex quadrilateral with the same side lengths. Given that the question is about not assuming things that aren't explicitly stated, I think it may be worth at least mentioning that assumption.
    $endgroup$
    – David Z
    16 hours ago











    14












    $begingroup$

    You are correct that the given solution is wrong. Worse still, even if you know that the angles between BC and CD are both right-angles, the purported answer is still wrong! This is because if you're given the lengths of A,B,C, it still does not uniquely determine D because we are not told that the angle between AB is less than $90°$.



    In general, it is not enough even if you have all four side lengths. For example, consider convex quadrilateral $PQRS$ such that $PQ = 6$ and $QR = 9$ and $RS = 7$ and $SP = 8$. It is possible that $P,R$ are slightly less than $15$ apart, making $PQRS$ a very skinny quadrilateral whose area can be made arbitrarily close to zero. Alternatively, moving $P,R$ to a distance of $10$ makes $PQRS$ rather square-like with area clearly more than $48$. Bretschneider's formula gives the area for an arbitrary quadrilateral, and you can see from it as well that fixing the side lengths is not enough to determine the area, since it also varies with the sum of two opposite angles.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      14












      $begingroup$

      You are correct that the given solution is wrong. Worse still, even if you know that the angles between BC and CD are both right-angles, the purported answer is still wrong! This is because if you're given the lengths of A,B,C, it still does not uniquely determine D because we are not told that the angle between AB is less than $90°$.



      In general, it is not enough even if you have all four side lengths. For example, consider convex quadrilateral $PQRS$ such that $PQ = 6$ and $QR = 9$ and $RS = 7$ and $SP = 8$. It is possible that $P,R$ are slightly less than $15$ apart, making $PQRS$ a very skinny quadrilateral whose area can be made arbitrarily close to zero. Alternatively, moving $P,R$ to a distance of $10$ makes $PQRS$ rather square-like with area clearly more than $48$. Bretschneider's formula gives the area for an arbitrary quadrilateral, and you can see from it as well that fixing the side lengths is not enough to determine the area, since it also varies with the sum of two opposite angles.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        14












        14








        14





        $begingroup$

        You are correct that the given solution is wrong. Worse still, even if you know that the angles between BC and CD are both right-angles, the purported answer is still wrong! This is because if you're given the lengths of A,B,C, it still does not uniquely determine D because we are not told that the angle between AB is less than $90°$.



        In general, it is not enough even if you have all four side lengths. For example, consider convex quadrilateral $PQRS$ such that $PQ = 6$ and $QR = 9$ and $RS = 7$ and $SP = 8$. It is possible that $P,R$ are slightly less than $15$ apart, making $PQRS$ a very skinny quadrilateral whose area can be made arbitrarily close to zero. Alternatively, moving $P,R$ to a distance of $10$ makes $PQRS$ rather square-like with area clearly more than $48$. Bretschneider's formula gives the area for an arbitrary quadrilateral, and you can see from it as well that fixing the side lengths is not enough to determine the area, since it also varies with the sum of two opposite angles.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        You are correct that the given solution is wrong. Worse still, even if you know that the angles between BC and CD are both right-angles, the purported answer is still wrong! This is because if you're given the lengths of A,B,C, it still does not uniquely determine D because we are not told that the angle between AB is less than $90°$.



        In general, it is not enough even if you have all four side lengths. For example, consider convex quadrilateral $PQRS$ such that $PQ = 6$ and $QR = 9$ and $RS = 7$ and $SP = 8$. It is possible that $P,R$ are slightly less than $15$ apart, making $PQRS$ a very skinny quadrilateral whose area can be made arbitrarily close to zero. Alternatively, moving $P,R$ to a distance of $10$ makes $PQRS$ rather square-like with area clearly more than $48$. Bretschneider's formula gives the area for an arbitrary quadrilateral, and you can see from it as well that fixing the side lengths is not enough to determine the area, since it also varies with the sum of two opposite angles.







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 14 hours ago

























        answered 23 hours ago









        user21820user21820

        40k544160




        40k544160





















            9












            $begingroup$

            You are right: there is absolutely no indication that angle $DC$ is a right angle. If they wanted you to assume it was a right angle, they should have indicated that with another $90$. It really doesn't even look like a right angle (somebody had the bright idea of trying to render the picture in perspective, but we don't even know where the horizon is supposed to be).






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
              $endgroup$
              – Jack O.
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
              $endgroup$
              – Deepak
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
              $endgroup$
              – user21820
              15 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
              $endgroup$
              – Acccumulation
              11 hours ago















            9












            $begingroup$

            You are right: there is absolutely no indication that angle $DC$ is a right angle. If they wanted you to assume it was a right angle, they should have indicated that with another $90$. It really doesn't even look like a right angle (somebody had the bright idea of trying to render the picture in perspective, but we don't even know where the horizon is supposed to be).






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$












            • $begingroup$
              That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
              $endgroup$
              – Jack O.
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
              $endgroup$
              – Deepak
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
              $endgroup$
              – user21820
              15 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
              $endgroup$
              – Acccumulation
              11 hours ago













            9












            9








            9





            $begingroup$

            You are right: there is absolutely no indication that angle $DC$ is a right angle. If they wanted you to assume it was a right angle, they should have indicated that with another $90$. It really doesn't even look like a right angle (somebody had the bright idea of trying to render the picture in perspective, but we don't even know where the horizon is supposed to be).






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            You are right: there is absolutely no indication that angle $DC$ is a right angle. If they wanted you to assume it was a right angle, they should have indicated that with another $90$. It really doesn't even look like a right angle (somebody had the bright idea of trying to render the picture in perspective, but we don't even know where the horizon is supposed to be).







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered yesterday









            Robert IsraelRobert Israel

            330k23219473




            330k23219473











            • $begingroup$
              That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
              $endgroup$
              – Jack O.
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
              $endgroup$
              – Deepak
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
              $endgroup$
              – user21820
              15 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
              $endgroup$
              – Acccumulation
              11 hours ago
















            • $begingroup$
              That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
              $endgroup$
              – Jack O.
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
              $endgroup$
              – Deepak
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
              $endgroup$
              – fleablood
              yesterday










            • $begingroup$
              @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
              $endgroup$
              – user21820
              15 hours ago










            • $begingroup$
              The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
              $endgroup$
              – Acccumulation
              11 hours ago















            $begingroup$
            That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Jack O.
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            That's what I thought. It should explicitly state if any angles are right. However my second question remains, given DC is ambiguous, is this question solvable? I don't think there would be enough information to solve in this case.
            $endgroup$
            – Jack O.
            yesterday












            $begingroup$
            @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
            $endgroup$
            – Deepak
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            @JackO. See my answer. The correct answer would be "All sides must be known".
            $endgroup$
            – Deepak
            yesterday












            $begingroup$
            If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
            $endgroup$
            – fleablood
            yesterday




            $begingroup$
            If we know all four lengths and assume no angle is more than 180, then I think there is only one quadrilateral so the area will be unique. I think. But you need all four. If you only three the fourth can be many lengths if the third one "swings".
            $endgroup$
            – fleablood
            yesterday












            $begingroup$
            @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
            $endgroup$
            – user21820
            15 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            @fleablood: No, in general there are infinitely many quadrilaterals with the same sides in the same order. See Bretschneider's formula for area of a quadrilateral given all sides and 2 opposite angles.
            $endgroup$
            – user21820
            15 hours ago












            $begingroup$
            The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
            $endgroup$
            – Acccumulation
            11 hours ago




            $begingroup$
            The rectangle appears to be drawn with "thickness", and if we assume that the thickness is perpendicular to the other sides, we might be able to figure out where the horizon is ... but I'm not sure that there is actually any consistent solution; the other two corners don't have thickness, which imposes constraints on the horizon (it must be such that the other "side" of the thickness for those corners is behind the corners) that may not be satisfiable.
            $endgroup$
            – Acccumulation
            11 hours ago










            Jack O. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Jack O. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Jack O. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            Jack O. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            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.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3172745%2fcan-we-compute-the-area-of-a-quadrilateral-with-one-right-angle-when-we-only-kno%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            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







            Popular posts from this blog

            Get product attribute by attribute group code in magento 2get product attribute by product attribute group in magento 2Magento 2 Log Bundle Product Data in List Page?How to get all product attribute of a attribute group of Default attribute set?Magento 2.1 Create a filter in the product grid by new attributeMagento 2 : Get Product Attribute values By GroupMagento 2 How to get all existing values for one attributeMagento 2 get custom attribute of a single product inside a pluginMagento 2.3 How to get all the Multi Source Inventory (MSI) locations collection in custom module?Magento2: how to develop rest API to get new productsGet product attribute by attribute group code ( [attribute_group_code] ) in magento 2

            Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

            Magento 2.3: How do i solve this, Not registered handle, on custom form?How can i rewrite TierPrice Block in Magento2magento 2 captcha not rendering if I override layout xmlmain.CRITICAL: Plugin class doesn't existMagento 2 : Problem while adding custom button order view page?Magento 2.2.5: Overriding Admin Controller sales/orderMagento 2.2.5: Add, Update and Delete existing products Custom OptionsMagento 2.3 : File Upload issue in UI Component FormMagento2 Not registered handleHow to configured Form Builder Js in my custom magento 2.3.0 module?Magento 2.3. How to create image upload field in an admin form