Can area of rectangle be greater than the square of its diagonal?











up vote
31
down vote

favorite
4













Q: A wall, rectangular in shape, has a perimeter of 72 m. If the length of its diagonal is 18 m, what is the area of the wall ?




The answer given to me is area of 486 m2. This is the explanation given to me
This is the explanation given to me




Is it possible to have a rectangle of diagonal 18 m and area greater than the area of a square of side 18 m ?











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 21




    The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
    – Théophile
    yesterday








  • 8




    The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
    – alephzero
    yesterday








  • 7




    The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
    – 1123581321
    yesterday






  • 7




    @1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
    – Teepeemm
    yesterday






  • 6




    As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
    – Arcanist Lupus
    yesterday















up vote
31
down vote

favorite
4













Q: A wall, rectangular in shape, has a perimeter of 72 m. If the length of its diagonal is 18 m, what is the area of the wall ?




The answer given to me is area of 486 m2. This is the explanation given to me
This is the explanation given to me




Is it possible to have a rectangle of diagonal 18 m and area greater than the area of a square of side 18 m ?











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
















  • 21




    The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
    – Théophile
    yesterday








  • 8




    The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
    – alephzero
    yesterday








  • 7




    The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
    – 1123581321
    yesterday






  • 7




    @1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
    – Teepeemm
    yesterday






  • 6




    As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
    – Arcanist Lupus
    yesterday













up vote
31
down vote

favorite
4









up vote
31
down vote

favorite
4






4






Q: A wall, rectangular in shape, has a perimeter of 72 m. If the length of its diagonal is 18 m, what is the area of the wall ?




The answer given to me is area of 486 m2. This is the explanation given to me
This is the explanation given to me




Is it possible to have a rectangle of diagonal 18 m and area greater than the area of a square of side 18 m ?











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












Q: A wall, rectangular in shape, has a perimeter of 72 m. If the length of its diagonal is 18 m, what is the area of the wall ?




The answer given to me is area of 486 m2. This is the explanation given to me
This is the explanation given to me




Is it possible to have a rectangle of diagonal 18 m and area greater than the area of a square of side 18 m ?








geometry area






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




user17838 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




user17838 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 yesterday





















New contributor




user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked yesterday









user17838

16326




16326




New contributor




user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






user17838 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.








  • 21




    The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
    – Théophile
    yesterday








  • 8




    The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
    – alephzero
    yesterday








  • 7




    The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
    – 1123581321
    yesterday






  • 7




    @1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
    – Teepeemm
    yesterday






  • 6




    As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
    – Arcanist Lupus
    yesterday














  • 21




    The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
    – Théophile
    yesterday








  • 8




    The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
    – alephzero
    yesterday








  • 7




    The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
    – 1123581321
    yesterday






  • 7




    @1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
    – Teepeemm
    yesterday






  • 6




    As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
    – Arcanist Lupus
    yesterday








21




21




The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
– Théophile
yesterday






The given solution is preposterous. (Note that for a rectangle with fixed perimeter, the diagonal is shortest when the rectangle is a square. Therefore the diagonal must be at least $18sqrt2 textrm m$ long.) On the bright side, perhaps you are better off not working for a company that won't listen to reason.
– Théophile
yesterday






8




8




The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
– alephzero
yesterday






The area of the wall is $144h$ m${}^2$, where $h$ is the height of the wall. (Note, trick question alert - the wall has two sides so the answer is not $72h$.) Oh, you mean you want the area enclosed by the wall? Then why didn't you say so???
– alephzero
yesterday






7




7




The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
– 1123581321
yesterday




The problem with the question is that if you solve for the side lengths you get complex numbers.
– 1123581321
yesterday




7




7




@1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
– Teepeemm
yesterday




@1123581321 Specifically, $l$ and $b$ are $18pm9isqrt2$.
– Teepeemm
yesterday




6




6




As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
– Arcanist Lupus
yesterday




As Van Helsing would say, "It is good logic, as far as it goes." The procedure they show is a good one for calculating the area from the given information. It just assumes that the provided information described a Euclidean rectangle, which in this case it does not.
– Arcanist Lupus
yesterday










11 Answers
11






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
66
down vote



accepted










The area of the square built on the diagonal must be at least twice the area of the rectangle:



$hskip 4 cm$ enter image description here






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    62
    down vote













    Another proof without words, at the suggestion of Semiclassical:



    enter image description here



    The dark rectangle has some fixed diagonal $d$. The large square has area $d^2$.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
      – mckenzm
      yesterday






    • 1




      Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
      – Xander Henderson
      yesterday


















    up vote
    22
    down vote













    A simple explanation without proof or pictures:



    The diagonal of a rectangle is at least as long as each of its sides, so the square of the diagonal must be at least the product of the sides.






    share|cite|improve this answer























    • Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
      – DaG
      7 hours ago










    • Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
      – AlexanderJ93
      7 hours ago










    • +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
      – DaG
      7 hours ago


















    up vote
    19
    down vote













    In fact, the squared diagonal must be at least twice the area, i.e. $a^2+b^2ge 2ab$ if orthogonal sides' lengths are $a,,b$. Why? Because the difference is $(a-b)^2ge 0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      8
      down vote













      You can prove that no such rectangle exists as follows:



      Let $l ge b$ (one side of the rectangle has to be the longest). Since $2l+2b=72$ you have $2lge l+b= 36$ so $l ge 18$



      Then the diagonal of a right-angled triangle is the longest side so $dgt lge 18$ for a non-degenerate triangle, and the only degenerate case which arises is with $l=36, b=0, d=36$.



      The answer given, though arithmetically correct does not represent a real wall.





      I am not sure what the question means, though, as it is curiously phrased. The question asks for "the area of the wall" and not "the area of the rectangle bounded by the wall" and had the answer not been set out, I might have been thinking of a wall of uniform thickness and external perimeter $72$ and an internal diagonal of $18$ to make any sense of it.






      share|cite|improve this answer





















      • To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
        – Ilmari Karonen
        yesterday






      • 1




        @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
        – Mark Bennet
        yesterday




















      up vote
      4
      down vote













      No. As others have said.



      What this looks like to me (as someone who has taught HS Chem & Physics for years and has helped write middle school math content) is a question written trying to get someone to put together the solution as shown, but without checking whether the numbers given make any real-world sense. I have certainly made this mistake myself, even though I try really hard to catch it.



      If this is a standardized test question (or one from a textbook, practice book, online resource, etc.), fair play, we've caught a poorly written question.



      If this is a question you are writing yourself, and you want to improve it, you could change the parameters this way:



      Total perimeter: 70
      Diagonal: 25 (I don't think you'll find any nice whole numbers - aka pythagorean triples - using a perimeter of 72.)



      This should now give the solution of:




      • $I^2 + B^2 = 25^2 = 625 $

      • $2I + 2B = 70 $

      • $I + B = 35 $

      • $I^2 + 2IB + B^2 = 1,225 $

      • $2IB = 600 $


      • $IB = 300$ ,


      which makes sense, given that I used a (3,4,5) right triangle (scaled by 5) in my setup. (Which means that I = 15 and B = 20, for a hypotenuse of 25.)



      Hope that helps!



      -Van






      share|cite|improve this answer








      New contributor




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

























        up vote
        2
        down vote













        No. Using Pythagoras and a simple inequality we get
        $$d^2=a^2+b^2geq 2abgeq ab$$
        If $a,b$ are the sides and $d$ the diagonal






        share|cite|improve this answer




























          up vote
          2
          down vote













          No, use the Pythagorean Theorem.



          $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



          $c$ is the length of the diagonal. It divides the rectangle into two congruent right triangles with hypotenuse $c$. $a$ and $b$ are the pairs of sides of the rectangle (and the other two sides of each congruent right triangle).



          Recall for any real number, its square must be non-negative.



          $$(a-b)^2 geq 0 implies a^2-2ab+b^2 geq 0 implies color{blue}{a^2+b^2 geq 2ab}$$



          The area of the rectangle is $ab$, but $c^2 geq 2ab$, so the square of the diagonal is at least twice the area of the rectangle.



          Now, to find the area itself.



          For the diagonal:



          $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



          $$implies 18^2 = a^2+b^2$$



          $$color{blue}{324 = a^2+b^2} tag{1}$$



          For the perimeter:



          $$2(a+b) = 72$$



          $$a+b = 36$$



          Now, define one variable in terms of the other.



          $$color{purple}{a = 36-b} tag{2}$$



          Combine $(1)$ and $(2)$.



          $$324 = a^2+b^2 implies 324 = (36-b)^2+b^2$$



          $$324 = 36^2-2(36)b+b^2+b^2 implies 324 = 1296-72b+2b^2 implies 2b^2-72b+972 = 0$$



          But $$Delta = b^2-4ac$$



          $$Delta = 72^2-4(2)(972) = -2592$$



          $$implies Delta < 0$$



          Thus, there is no solution. (No such rectangle exists.)






          share|cite|improve this answer






























            up vote
            1
            down vote













            Another PWW (noted by AlexanderJ93 and others):



            $hspace{5cm}$![enter image description here






            share|cite|improve this answer




























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              $A=lw$



              $P=2(l+w)$



              $d=sqrt{l^2+w^2}$



              Can $A>d^2$?



              Can $lw>l^2+w^2$?



              $-lw>l^2-2wl+w^2=(l-w)^2$



              Width and length are necessarily positive. The square of their difference also must be positive.



              So we have a negative number that must be greater than a positive number. A contradiction.






              share|cite|improve this answer




























                up vote
                0
                down vote













                A wall has a thickness.



                Let's say the rectangle of the wall has width a and length b on the outside, so 2a + 2b = 72 or a + b = 36.



                Assume the wall has a uniform thickness t. Then we can calculate the length of the diagonal as $(a - 2t)^2 + (b - 2t)^2 = d^2$. Given that d = 18, this lets us calculate t based on d, and the area of the wall is (2a + 2b - 4t) * t or (72 - 4t) * t.



                The solution is $t = 9 ± (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. For a solution to exist, we need $9a - a^2/4 - 40.5 ≥ 0$ or $162^{1/2} ≥ |a - 18|$ or $18 - 162^{1/2} ≤ a ≤18 + 162^{1/2}$, so a is roughly between 5 and 31.



                We can exclude the solution $t = 9 + (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$ - the walls cannot be more than 9 thick. Therefore $t = 9 - (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. We can show that the calculated thickness is always ≥ 0.



                This t can be used to calculate the area of the wall as (72 - 4t) * t.



                Alternatively, if the wall has zero thickness, then the diagonal is not 18. Everything follows from a false statement, so the wall can have any area.






                share|cite|improve this answer





















                  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',
                  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
                  });


                  }
                  });






                  user17838 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%2f3000024%2fcan-area-of-rectangle-be-greater-than-the-square-of-its-diagonal%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                  }
                  );

                  Post as a guest















                  Required, but never shown

























                  11 Answers
                  11






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes








                  11 Answers
                  11






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes









                  active

                  oldest

                  votes






                  active

                  oldest

                  votes








                  up vote
                  66
                  down vote



                  accepted










                  The area of the square built on the diagonal must be at least twice the area of the rectangle:



                  $hskip 4 cm$ enter image description here






                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                    up vote
                    66
                    down vote



                    accepted










                    The area of the square built on the diagonal must be at least twice the area of the rectangle:



                    $hskip 4 cm$ enter image description here






                    share|cite|improve this answer























                      up vote
                      66
                      down vote



                      accepted







                      up vote
                      66
                      down vote



                      accepted






                      The area of the square built on the diagonal must be at least twice the area of the rectangle:



                      $hskip 4 cm$ enter image description here






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      The area of the square built on the diagonal must be at least twice the area of the rectangle:



                      $hskip 4 cm$ enter image description here







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered yesterday









                      Théophile

                      19k12944




                      19k12944






















                          up vote
                          62
                          down vote













                          Another proof without words, at the suggestion of Semiclassical:



                          enter image description here



                          The dark rectangle has some fixed diagonal $d$. The large square has area $d^2$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer























                          • +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                            – mckenzm
                            yesterday






                          • 1




                            Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                            – Xander Henderson
                            yesterday















                          up vote
                          62
                          down vote













                          Another proof without words, at the suggestion of Semiclassical:



                          enter image description here



                          The dark rectangle has some fixed diagonal $d$. The large square has area $d^2$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer























                          • +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                            – mckenzm
                            yesterday






                          • 1




                            Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                            – Xander Henderson
                            yesterday













                          up vote
                          62
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          62
                          down vote









                          Another proof without words, at the suggestion of Semiclassical:



                          enter image description here



                          The dark rectangle has some fixed diagonal $d$. The large square has area $d^2$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          Another proof without words, at the suggestion of Semiclassical:



                          enter image description here



                          The dark rectangle has some fixed diagonal $d$. The large square has area $d^2$.







                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          answered yesterday


























                          community wiki





                          Xander Henderson













                          • +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                            – mckenzm
                            yesterday






                          • 1




                            Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                            – Xander Henderson
                            yesterday


















                          • +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                            – mckenzm
                            yesterday






                          • 1




                            Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                            – Xander Henderson
                            yesterday
















                          +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                          – mckenzm
                          yesterday




                          +1 It is often useful to consider the extremes, similar to "annulus" type problems. there is no solution for the perimeter between l=0 and l=18, therefore the perimeter or the diagonal has been misstated. A graph of the length vs perimeter would show the same.
                          – mckenzm
                          yesterday




                          1




                          1




                          Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                          – Xander Henderson
                          yesterday




                          Here is a more dynamic, animated version of the same picture.
                          – Xander Henderson
                          yesterday










                          up vote
                          22
                          down vote













                          A simple explanation without proof or pictures:



                          The diagonal of a rectangle is at least as long as each of its sides, so the square of the diagonal must be at least the product of the sides.






                          share|cite|improve this answer























                          • Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago










                          • Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                            – AlexanderJ93
                            7 hours ago










                          • +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago















                          up vote
                          22
                          down vote













                          A simple explanation without proof or pictures:



                          The diagonal of a rectangle is at least as long as each of its sides, so the square of the diagonal must be at least the product of the sides.






                          share|cite|improve this answer























                          • Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago










                          • Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                            – AlexanderJ93
                            7 hours ago










                          • +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago













                          up vote
                          22
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          22
                          down vote









                          A simple explanation without proof or pictures:



                          The diagonal of a rectangle is at least as long as each of its sides, so the square of the diagonal must be at least the product of the sides.






                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          A simple explanation without proof or pictures:



                          The diagonal of a rectangle is at least as long as each of its sides, so the square of the diagonal must be at least the product of the sides.







                          share|cite|improve this answer














                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer








                          edited 7 hours ago

























                          answered yesterday









                          AlexanderJ93

                          5,117422




                          5,117422












                          • Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago










                          • Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                            – AlexanderJ93
                            7 hours ago










                          • +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago


















                          • Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago










                          • Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                            – AlexanderJ93
                            7 hours ago










                          • +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                            – DaG
                            7 hours ago
















                          Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                          – DaG
                          7 hours ago




                          Great explanation, but that “it's” is jarring...
                          – DaG
                          7 hours ago












                          Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                          – AlexanderJ93
                          7 hours ago




                          Sorry! This is my number 1 typo, and I miss it all the time in proofreading. Fixed now, thanks!
                          – AlexanderJ93
                          7 hours ago












                          +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                          – DaG
                          7 hours ago




                          +1 Thank you for the one-line proof!
                          – DaG
                          7 hours ago










                          up vote
                          19
                          down vote













                          In fact, the squared diagonal must be at least twice the area, i.e. $a^2+b^2ge 2ab$ if orthogonal sides' lengths are $a,,b$. Why? Because the difference is $(a-b)^2ge 0$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                            up vote
                            19
                            down vote













                            In fact, the squared diagonal must be at least twice the area, i.e. $a^2+b^2ge 2ab$ if orthogonal sides' lengths are $a,,b$. Why? Because the difference is $(a-b)^2ge 0$.






                            share|cite|improve this answer























                              up vote
                              19
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              19
                              down vote









                              In fact, the squared diagonal must be at least twice the area, i.e. $a^2+b^2ge 2ab$ if orthogonal sides' lengths are $a,,b$. Why? Because the difference is $(a-b)^2ge 0$.






                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              In fact, the squared diagonal must be at least twice the area, i.e. $a^2+b^2ge 2ab$ if orthogonal sides' lengths are $a,,b$. Why? Because the difference is $(a-b)^2ge 0$.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered yesterday









                              J.G.

                              17.9k11830




                              17.9k11830






















                                  up vote
                                  8
                                  down vote













                                  You can prove that no such rectangle exists as follows:



                                  Let $l ge b$ (one side of the rectangle has to be the longest). Since $2l+2b=72$ you have $2lge l+b= 36$ so $l ge 18$



                                  Then the diagonal of a right-angled triangle is the longest side so $dgt lge 18$ for a non-degenerate triangle, and the only degenerate case which arises is with $l=36, b=0, d=36$.



                                  The answer given, though arithmetically correct does not represent a real wall.





                                  I am not sure what the question means, though, as it is curiously phrased. The question asks for "the area of the wall" and not "the area of the rectangle bounded by the wall" and had the answer not been set out, I might have been thinking of a wall of uniform thickness and external perimeter $72$ and an internal diagonal of $18$ to make any sense of it.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                    – Ilmari Karonen
                                    yesterday






                                  • 1




                                    @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                    – Mark Bennet
                                    yesterday

















                                  up vote
                                  8
                                  down vote













                                  You can prove that no such rectangle exists as follows:



                                  Let $l ge b$ (one side of the rectangle has to be the longest). Since $2l+2b=72$ you have $2lge l+b= 36$ so $l ge 18$



                                  Then the diagonal of a right-angled triangle is the longest side so $dgt lge 18$ for a non-degenerate triangle, and the only degenerate case which arises is with $l=36, b=0, d=36$.



                                  The answer given, though arithmetically correct does not represent a real wall.





                                  I am not sure what the question means, though, as it is curiously phrased. The question asks for "the area of the wall" and not "the area of the rectangle bounded by the wall" and had the answer not been set out, I might have been thinking of a wall of uniform thickness and external perimeter $72$ and an internal diagonal of $18$ to make any sense of it.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer





















                                  • To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                    – Ilmari Karonen
                                    yesterday






                                  • 1




                                    @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                    – Mark Bennet
                                    yesterday















                                  up vote
                                  8
                                  down vote










                                  up vote
                                  8
                                  down vote









                                  You can prove that no such rectangle exists as follows:



                                  Let $l ge b$ (one side of the rectangle has to be the longest). Since $2l+2b=72$ you have $2lge l+b= 36$ so $l ge 18$



                                  Then the diagonal of a right-angled triangle is the longest side so $dgt lge 18$ for a non-degenerate triangle, and the only degenerate case which arises is with $l=36, b=0, d=36$.



                                  The answer given, though arithmetically correct does not represent a real wall.





                                  I am not sure what the question means, though, as it is curiously phrased. The question asks for "the area of the wall" and not "the area of the rectangle bounded by the wall" and had the answer not been set out, I might have been thinking of a wall of uniform thickness and external perimeter $72$ and an internal diagonal of $18$ to make any sense of it.






                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  You can prove that no such rectangle exists as follows:



                                  Let $l ge b$ (one side of the rectangle has to be the longest). Since $2l+2b=72$ you have $2lge l+b= 36$ so $l ge 18$



                                  Then the diagonal of a right-angled triangle is the longest side so $dgt lge 18$ for a non-degenerate triangle, and the only degenerate case which arises is with $l=36, b=0, d=36$.



                                  The answer given, though arithmetically correct does not represent a real wall.





                                  I am not sure what the question means, though, as it is curiously phrased. The question asks for "the area of the wall" and not "the area of the rectangle bounded by the wall" and had the answer not been set out, I might have been thinking of a wall of uniform thickness and external perimeter $72$ and an internal diagonal of $18$ to make any sense of it.







                                  share|cite|improve this answer












                                  share|cite|improve this answer



                                  share|cite|improve this answer










                                  answered yesterday









                                  Mark Bennet

                                  79.5k978177




                                  79.5k978177












                                  • To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                    – Ilmari Karonen
                                    yesterday






                                  • 1




                                    @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                    – Mark Bennet
                                    yesterday




















                                  • To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                    – Ilmari Karonen
                                    yesterday






                                  • 1




                                    @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                    – Mark Bennet
                                    yesterday


















                                  To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                  – Ilmari Karonen
                                  yesterday




                                  To address your comment at the end, I'm pretty sure they mean "a wall" as in "one of the (usually) four walls of a room", not as in "a wall surrounding an area of land". So the wall itself is a rectangular surface, with width $ell$ and height $b$.
                                  – Ilmari Karonen
                                  yesterday




                                  1




                                  1




                                  @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                  – Mark Bennet
                                  yesterday






                                  @IlmariKaronen Just goes to show how careful one has to be reading and interpreting (and setting) questions.
                                  – Mark Bennet
                                  yesterday












                                  up vote
                                  4
                                  down vote













                                  No. As others have said.



                                  What this looks like to me (as someone who has taught HS Chem & Physics for years and has helped write middle school math content) is a question written trying to get someone to put together the solution as shown, but without checking whether the numbers given make any real-world sense. I have certainly made this mistake myself, even though I try really hard to catch it.



                                  If this is a standardized test question (or one from a textbook, practice book, online resource, etc.), fair play, we've caught a poorly written question.



                                  If this is a question you are writing yourself, and you want to improve it, you could change the parameters this way:



                                  Total perimeter: 70
                                  Diagonal: 25 (I don't think you'll find any nice whole numbers - aka pythagorean triples - using a perimeter of 72.)



                                  This should now give the solution of:




                                  • $I^2 + B^2 = 25^2 = 625 $

                                  • $2I + 2B = 70 $

                                  • $I + B = 35 $

                                  • $I^2 + 2IB + B^2 = 1,225 $

                                  • $2IB = 600 $


                                  • $IB = 300$ ,


                                  which makes sense, given that I used a (3,4,5) right triangle (scaled by 5) in my setup. (Which means that I = 15 and B = 20, for a hypotenuse of 25.)



                                  Hope that helps!



                                  -Van






                                  share|cite|improve this answer








                                  New contributor




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






















                                    up vote
                                    4
                                    down vote













                                    No. As others have said.



                                    What this looks like to me (as someone who has taught HS Chem & Physics for years and has helped write middle school math content) is a question written trying to get someone to put together the solution as shown, but without checking whether the numbers given make any real-world sense. I have certainly made this mistake myself, even though I try really hard to catch it.



                                    If this is a standardized test question (or one from a textbook, practice book, online resource, etc.), fair play, we've caught a poorly written question.



                                    If this is a question you are writing yourself, and you want to improve it, you could change the parameters this way:



                                    Total perimeter: 70
                                    Diagonal: 25 (I don't think you'll find any nice whole numbers - aka pythagorean triples - using a perimeter of 72.)



                                    This should now give the solution of:




                                    • $I^2 + B^2 = 25^2 = 625 $

                                    • $2I + 2B = 70 $

                                    • $I + B = 35 $

                                    • $I^2 + 2IB + B^2 = 1,225 $

                                    • $2IB = 600 $


                                    • $IB = 300$ ,


                                    which makes sense, given that I used a (3,4,5) right triangle (scaled by 5) in my setup. (Which means that I = 15 and B = 20, for a hypotenuse of 25.)



                                    Hope that helps!



                                    -Van






                                    share|cite|improve this answer








                                    New contributor




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




















                                      up vote
                                      4
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      4
                                      down vote









                                      No. As others have said.



                                      What this looks like to me (as someone who has taught HS Chem & Physics for years and has helped write middle school math content) is a question written trying to get someone to put together the solution as shown, but without checking whether the numbers given make any real-world sense. I have certainly made this mistake myself, even though I try really hard to catch it.



                                      If this is a standardized test question (or one from a textbook, practice book, online resource, etc.), fair play, we've caught a poorly written question.



                                      If this is a question you are writing yourself, and you want to improve it, you could change the parameters this way:



                                      Total perimeter: 70
                                      Diagonal: 25 (I don't think you'll find any nice whole numbers - aka pythagorean triples - using a perimeter of 72.)



                                      This should now give the solution of:




                                      • $I^2 + B^2 = 25^2 = 625 $

                                      • $2I + 2B = 70 $

                                      • $I + B = 35 $

                                      • $I^2 + 2IB + B^2 = 1,225 $

                                      • $2IB = 600 $


                                      • $IB = 300$ ,


                                      which makes sense, given that I used a (3,4,5) right triangle (scaled by 5) in my setup. (Which means that I = 15 and B = 20, for a hypotenuse of 25.)



                                      Hope that helps!



                                      -Van






                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      New contributor




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









                                      No. As others have said.



                                      What this looks like to me (as someone who has taught HS Chem & Physics for years and has helped write middle school math content) is a question written trying to get someone to put together the solution as shown, but without checking whether the numbers given make any real-world sense. I have certainly made this mistake myself, even though I try really hard to catch it.



                                      If this is a standardized test question (or one from a textbook, practice book, online resource, etc.), fair play, we've caught a poorly written question.



                                      If this is a question you are writing yourself, and you want to improve it, you could change the parameters this way:



                                      Total perimeter: 70
                                      Diagonal: 25 (I don't think you'll find any nice whole numbers - aka pythagorean triples - using a perimeter of 72.)



                                      This should now give the solution of:




                                      • $I^2 + B^2 = 25^2 = 625 $

                                      • $2I + 2B = 70 $

                                      • $I + B = 35 $

                                      • $I^2 + 2IB + B^2 = 1,225 $

                                      • $2IB = 600 $


                                      • $IB = 300$ ,


                                      which makes sense, given that I used a (3,4,5) right triangle (scaled by 5) in my setup. (Which means that I = 15 and B = 20, for a hypotenuse of 25.)



                                      Hope that helps!



                                      -Van







                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      New contributor




                                      Van 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 answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer






                                      New contributor




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









                                      answered 22 hours ago









                                      Van

                                      413




                                      413




                                      New contributor




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





                                      New contributor





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






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






















                                          up vote
                                          2
                                          down vote













                                          No. Using Pythagoras and a simple inequality we get
                                          $$d^2=a^2+b^2geq 2abgeq ab$$
                                          If $a,b$ are the sides and $d$ the diagonal






                                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                                            up vote
                                            2
                                            down vote













                                            No. Using Pythagoras and a simple inequality we get
                                            $$d^2=a^2+b^2geq 2abgeq ab$$
                                            If $a,b$ are the sides and $d$ the diagonal






                                            share|cite|improve this answer























                                              up vote
                                              2
                                              down vote










                                              up vote
                                              2
                                              down vote









                                              No. Using Pythagoras and a simple inequality we get
                                              $$d^2=a^2+b^2geq 2abgeq ab$$
                                              If $a,b$ are the sides and $d$ the diagonal






                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                              No. Using Pythagoras and a simple inequality we get
                                              $$d^2=a^2+b^2geq 2abgeq ab$$
                                              If $a,b$ are the sides and $d$ the diagonal







                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                              share|cite|improve this answer



                                              share|cite|improve this answer










                                              answered yesterday









                                              b00n heT

                                              10.1k12134




                                              10.1k12134






















                                                  up vote
                                                  2
                                                  down vote













                                                  No, use the Pythagorean Theorem.



                                                  $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                  $c$ is the length of the diagonal. It divides the rectangle into two congruent right triangles with hypotenuse $c$. $a$ and $b$ are the pairs of sides of the rectangle (and the other two sides of each congruent right triangle).



                                                  Recall for any real number, its square must be non-negative.



                                                  $$(a-b)^2 geq 0 implies a^2-2ab+b^2 geq 0 implies color{blue}{a^2+b^2 geq 2ab}$$



                                                  The area of the rectangle is $ab$, but $c^2 geq 2ab$, so the square of the diagonal is at least twice the area of the rectangle.



                                                  Now, to find the area itself.



                                                  For the diagonal:



                                                  $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                  $$implies 18^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                  $$color{blue}{324 = a^2+b^2} tag{1}$$



                                                  For the perimeter:



                                                  $$2(a+b) = 72$$



                                                  $$a+b = 36$$



                                                  Now, define one variable in terms of the other.



                                                  $$color{purple}{a = 36-b} tag{2}$$



                                                  Combine $(1)$ and $(2)$.



                                                  $$324 = a^2+b^2 implies 324 = (36-b)^2+b^2$$



                                                  $$324 = 36^2-2(36)b+b^2+b^2 implies 324 = 1296-72b+2b^2 implies 2b^2-72b+972 = 0$$



                                                  But $$Delta = b^2-4ac$$



                                                  $$Delta = 72^2-4(2)(972) = -2592$$



                                                  $$implies Delta < 0$$



                                                  Thus, there is no solution. (No such rectangle exists.)






                                                  share|cite|improve this answer



























                                                    up vote
                                                    2
                                                    down vote













                                                    No, use the Pythagorean Theorem.



                                                    $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                    $c$ is the length of the diagonal. It divides the rectangle into two congruent right triangles with hypotenuse $c$. $a$ and $b$ are the pairs of sides of the rectangle (and the other two sides of each congruent right triangle).



                                                    Recall for any real number, its square must be non-negative.



                                                    $$(a-b)^2 geq 0 implies a^2-2ab+b^2 geq 0 implies color{blue}{a^2+b^2 geq 2ab}$$



                                                    The area of the rectangle is $ab$, but $c^2 geq 2ab$, so the square of the diagonal is at least twice the area of the rectangle.



                                                    Now, to find the area itself.



                                                    For the diagonal:



                                                    $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                    $$implies 18^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                    $$color{blue}{324 = a^2+b^2} tag{1}$$



                                                    For the perimeter:



                                                    $$2(a+b) = 72$$



                                                    $$a+b = 36$$



                                                    Now, define one variable in terms of the other.



                                                    $$color{purple}{a = 36-b} tag{2}$$



                                                    Combine $(1)$ and $(2)$.



                                                    $$324 = a^2+b^2 implies 324 = (36-b)^2+b^2$$



                                                    $$324 = 36^2-2(36)b+b^2+b^2 implies 324 = 1296-72b+2b^2 implies 2b^2-72b+972 = 0$$



                                                    But $$Delta = b^2-4ac$$



                                                    $$Delta = 72^2-4(2)(972) = -2592$$



                                                    $$implies Delta < 0$$



                                                    Thus, there is no solution. (No such rectangle exists.)






                                                    share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                      up vote
                                                      2
                                                      down vote










                                                      up vote
                                                      2
                                                      down vote









                                                      No, use the Pythagorean Theorem.



                                                      $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $c$ is the length of the diagonal. It divides the rectangle into two congruent right triangles with hypotenuse $c$. $a$ and $b$ are the pairs of sides of the rectangle (and the other two sides of each congruent right triangle).



                                                      Recall for any real number, its square must be non-negative.



                                                      $$(a-b)^2 geq 0 implies a^2-2ab+b^2 geq 0 implies color{blue}{a^2+b^2 geq 2ab}$$



                                                      The area of the rectangle is $ab$, but $c^2 geq 2ab$, so the square of the diagonal is at least twice the area of the rectangle.



                                                      Now, to find the area itself.



                                                      For the diagonal:



                                                      $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$implies 18^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$color{blue}{324 = a^2+b^2} tag{1}$$



                                                      For the perimeter:



                                                      $$2(a+b) = 72$$



                                                      $$a+b = 36$$



                                                      Now, define one variable in terms of the other.



                                                      $$color{purple}{a = 36-b} tag{2}$$



                                                      Combine $(1)$ and $(2)$.



                                                      $$324 = a^2+b^2 implies 324 = (36-b)^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$324 = 36^2-2(36)b+b^2+b^2 implies 324 = 1296-72b+2b^2 implies 2b^2-72b+972 = 0$$



                                                      But $$Delta = b^2-4ac$$



                                                      $$Delta = 72^2-4(2)(972) = -2592$$



                                                      $$implies Delta < 0$$



                                                      Thus, there is no solution. (No such rectangle exists.)






                                                      share|cite|improve this answer














                                                      No, use the Pythagorean Theorem.



                                                      $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $c$ is the length of the diagonal. It divides the rectangle into two congruent right triangles with hypotenuse $c$. $a$ and $b$ are the pairs of sides of the rectangle (and the other two sides of each congruent right triangle).



                                                      Recall for any real number, its square must be non-negative.



                                                      $$(a-b)^2 geq 0 implies a^2-2ab+b^2 geq 0 implies color{blue}{a^2+b^2 geq 2ab}$$



                                                      The area of the rectangle is $ab$, but $c^2 geq 2ab$, so the square of the diagonal is at least twice the area of the rectangle.



                                                      Now, to find the area itself.



                                                      For the diagonal:



                                                      $$c^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$implies 18^2 = a^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$color{blue}{324 = a^2+b^2} tag{1}$$



                                                      For the perimeter:



                                                      $$2(a+b) = 72$$



                                                      $$a+b = 36$$



                                                      Now, define one variable in terms of the other.



                                                      $$color{purple}{a = 36-b} tag{2}$$



                                                      Combine $(1)$ and $(2)$.



                                                      $$324 = a^2+b^2 implies 324 = (36-b)^2+b^2$$



                                                      $$324 = 36^2-2(36)b+b^2+b^2 implies 324 = 1296-72b+2b^2 implies 2b^2-72b+972 = 0$$



                                                      But $$Delta = b^2-4ac$$



                                                      $$Delta = 72^2-4(2)(972) = -2592$$



                                                      $$implies Delta < 0$$



                                                      Thus, there is no solution. (No such rectangle exists.)







                                                      share|cite|improve this answer














                                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                                      edited yesterday

























                                                      answered yesterday









                                                      KM101

                                                      1,765313




                                                      1,765313






















                                                          up vote
                                                          1
                                                          down vote













                                                          Another PWW (noted by AlexanderJ93 and others):



                                                          $hspace{5cm}$![enter image description here






                                                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                            up vote
                                                            1
                                                            down vote













                                                            Another PWW (noted by AlexanderJ93 and others):



                                                            $hspace{5cm}$![enter image description here






                                                            share|cite|improve this answer























                                                              up vote
                                                              1
                                                              down vote










                                                              up vote
                                                              1
                                                              down vote









                                                              Another PWW (noted by AlexanderJ93 and others):



                                                              $hspace{5cm}$![enter image description here






                                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                                              Another PWW (noted by AlexanderJ93 and others):



                                                              $hspace{5cm}$![enter image description here







                                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                                              share|cite|improve this answer



                                                              share|cite|improve this answer










                                                              answered 6 hours ago









                                                              farruhota

                                                              17.4k2736




                                                              17.4k2736






















                                                                  up vote
                                                                  0
                                                                  down vote













                                                                  $A=lw$



                                                                  $P=2(l+w)$



                                                                  $d=sqrt{l^2+w^2}$



                                                                  Can $A>d^2$?



                                                                  Can $lw>l^2+w^2$?



                                                                  $-lw>l^2-2wl+w^2=(l-w)^2$



                                                                  Width and length are necessarily positive. The square of their difference also must be positive.



                                                                  So we have a negative number that must be greater than a positive number. A contradiction.






                                                                  share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                                    up vote
                                                                    0
                                                                    down vote













                                                                    $A=lw$



                                                                    $P=2(l+w)$



                                                                    $d=sqrt{l^2+w^2}$



                                                                    Can $A>d^2$?



                                                                    Can $lw>l^2+w^2$?



                                                                    $-lw>l^2-2wl+w^2=(l-w)^2$



                                                                    Width and length are necessarily positive. The square of their difference also must be positive.



                                                                    So we have a negative number that must be greater than a positive number. A contradiction.






                                                                    share|cite|improve this answer























                                                                      up vote
                                                                      0
                                                                      down vote










                                                                      up vote
                                                                      0
                                                                      down vote









                                                                      $A=lw$



                                                                      $P=2(l+w)$



                                                                      $d=sqrt{l^2+w^2}$



                                                                      Can $A>d^2$?



                                                                      Can $lw>l^2+w^2$?



                                                                      $-lw>l^2-2wl+w^2=(l-w)^2$



                                                                      Width and length are necessarily positive. The square of their difference also must be positive.



                                                                      So we have a negative number that must be greater than a positive number. A contradiction.






                                                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                                                      $A=lw$



                                                                      $P=2(l+w)$



                                                                      $d=sqrt{l^2+w^2}$



                                                                      Can $A>d^2$?



                                                                      Can $lw>l^2+w^2$?



                                                                      $-lw>l^2-2wl+w^2=(l-w)^2$



                                                                      Width and length are necessarily positive. The square of their difference also must be positive.



                                                                      So we have a negative number that must be greater than a positive number. A contradiction.







                                                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                                                      answered yesterday









                                                                      TurlocTheRed

                                                                      55819




                                                                      55819






















                                                                          up vote
                                                                          0
                                                                          down vote













                                                                          A wall has a thickness.



                                                                          Let's say the rectangle of the wall has width a and length b on the outside, so 2a + 2b = 72 or a + b = 36.



                                                                          Assume the wall has a uniform thickness t. Then we can calculate the length of the diagonal as $(a - 2t)^2 + (b - 2t)^2 = d^2$. Given that d = 18, this lets us calculate t based on d, and the area of the wall is (2a + 2b - 4t) * t or (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                          The solution is $t = 9 ± (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. For a solution to exist, we need $9a - a^2/4 - 40.5 ≥ 0$ or $162^{1/2} ≥ |a - 18|$ or $18 - 162^{1/2} ≤ a ≤18 + 162^{1/2}$, so a is roughly between 5 and 31.



                                                                          We can exclude the solution $t = 9 + (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$ - the walls cannot be more than 9 thick. Therefore $t = 9 - (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. We can show that the calculated thickness is always ≥ 0.



                                                                          This t can be used to calculate the area of the wall as (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                          Alternatively, if the wall has zero thickness, then the diagonal is not 18. Everything follows from a false statement, so the wall can have any area.






                                                                          share|cite|improve this answer

























                                                                            up vote
                                                                            0
                                                                            down vote













                                                                            A wall has a thickness.



                                                                            Let's say the rectangle of the wall has width a and length b on the outside, so 2a + 2b = 72 or a + b = 36.



                                                                            Assume the wall has a uniform thickness t. Then we can calculate the length of the diagonal as $(a - 2t)^2 + (b - 2t)^2 = d^2$. Given that d = 18, this lets us calculate t based on d, and the area of the wall is (2a + 2b - 4t) * t or (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                            The solution is $t = 9 ± (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. For a solution to exist, we need $9a - a^2/4 - 40.5 ≥ 0$ or $162^{1/2} ≥ |a - 18|$ or $18 - 162^{1/2} ≤ a ≤18 + 162^{1/2}$, so a is roughly between 5 and 31.



                                                                            We can exclude the solution $t = 9 + (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$ - the walls cannot be more than 9 thick. Therefore $t = 9 - (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. We can show that the calculated thickness is always ≥ 0.



                                                                            This t can be used to calculate the area of the wall as (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                            Alternatively, if the wall has zero thickness, then the diagonal is not 18. Everything follows from a false statement, so the wall can have any area.






                                                                            share|cite|improve this answer























                                                                              up vote
                                                                              0
                                                                              down vote










                                                                              up vote
                                                                              0
                                                                              down vote









                                                                              A wall has a thickness.



                                                                              Let's say the rectangle of the wall has width a and length b on the outside, so 2a + 2b = 72 or a + b = 36.



                                                                              Assume the wall has a uniform thickness t. Then we can calculate the length of the diagonal as $(a - 2t)^2 + (b - 2t)^2 = d^2$. Given that d = 18, this lets us calculate t based on d, and the area of the wall is (2a + 2b - 4t) * t or (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                              The solution is $t = 9 ± (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. For a solution to exist, we need $9a - a^2/4 - 40.5 ≥ 0$ or $162^{1/2} ≥ |a - 18|$ or $18 - 162^{1/2} ≤ a ≤18 + 162^{1/2}$, so a is roughly between 5 and 31.



                                                                              We can exclude the solution $t = 9 + (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$ - the walls cannot be more than 9 thick. Therefore $t = 9 - (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. We can show that the calculated thickness is always ≥ 0.



                                                                              This t can be used to calculate the area of the wall as (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                              Alternatively, if the wall has zero thickness, then the diagonal is not 18. Everything follows from a false statement, so the wall can have any area.






                                                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                                                              A wall has a thickness.



                                                                              Let's say the rectangle of the wall has width a and length b on the outside, so 2a + 2b = 72 or a + b = 36.



                                                                              Assume the wall has a uniform thickness t. Then we can calculate the length of the diagonal as $(a - 2t)^2 + (b - 2t)^2 = d^2$. Given that d = 18, this lets us calculate t based on d, and the area of the wall is (2a + 2b - 4t) * t or (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                              The solution is $t = 9 ± (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. For a solution to exist, we need $9a - a^2/4 - 40.5 ≥ 0$ or $162^{1/2} ≥ |a - 18|$ or $18 - 162^{1/2} ≤ a ≤18 + 162^{1/2}$, so a is roughly between 5 and 31.



                                                                              We can exclude the solution $t = 9 + (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$ - the walls cannot be more than 9 thick. Therefore $t = 9 - (9a - a^2/4 - 40.5)^{1/2}$. We can show that the calculated thickness is always ≥ 0.



                                                                              This t can be used to calculate the area of the wall as (72 - 4t) * t.



                                                                              Alternatively, if the wall has zero thickness, then the diagonal is not 18. Everything follows from a false statement, so the wall can have any area.







                                                                              share|cite|improve this answer












                                                                              share|cite|improve this answer



                                                                              share|cite|improve this answer










                                                                              answered 17 hours ago









                                                                              gnasher729

                                                                              5,9511028




                                                                              5,9511028






















                                                                                  user17838 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                                                                                   

                                                                                  draft saved


                                                                                  draft discarded


















                                                                                  user17838 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                                                                                  user17838 is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                                                                                  user17838 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%2f3000024%2fcan-area-of-rectangle-be-greater-than-the-square-of-its-diagonal%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

                                                                                  Costa Masnaga

                                                                                  Fotorealismo

                                                                                  Sidney Franklin