This is possible because you add perimiters but multiply areas. Consider a 2 x 4 rectangle and a 1 x 5 rectangle. The first has a perimeter of 12 (2+2+4+4), and an area of 8 (2 x 4). The second rectangle has a perimeter of 12 also (1+1+5+5), but an area of 5 (5 x 1). The closer a rectangle is to a perfect square, the larger the area will be, because a square maximizes area. A 3 x 3 square also has a perimeter of 12, but an area of 9. Heres another way to think about it: a rectangle that is one inch tall and 100 inches wide would have a perimeter of 202 inches, and an area of 100 square inches. If you added one inch to the side so that it was 101 inches wide, you would add 2 inches to the perimeter, but only one square inch to the area. However, if you made it one inch taller, you would still add 2 inches to the perimeter, but you would DOUBLE the area to 200 square inches.
No, it is not. I'll give you two examples of a rectangle with a perimeter of 1. The first rectangle has dimensions of 1/4x1/4. The area is 1/16. The second rectangle has dimensions of 3/8x1/8. The area is 3/64. You can clearly see that these two rectangles have the same perimeter, yet the area is different.
You can`t be sure of the individual sides. A one inch by sixteen inch rectangle, an eight by two inch rectangle, a four inch by four inch rectangle all have the same area (16 square inches) but the first rectangle`s sides add up to 34, the second rectangle`s sides add up to 20, the third rectangle`s sides add up to 16
No.For example, a 1 metre * 72 metre rectangle and a 8 metre * 9 metre rectangle both have areas of 72 square metres. But the perimeter of the first is 146 metres while that of the second is 34 metres.
No. In the first place, the word is "multiply", not "times", and in the second place, to get the width you divide the perimeter by two and then subtract the length (there are alternative methods, but none of them is even close to multiplying the length by the perimeter).
Since the perimeter of a rectangle is 2 * length + 2 * width, 2l + 2w = 36 And since the length is twice the width, l = 2w Thus, you substitute 2w into the l in the first equation to get, 2(2w) + 2w = 36 4w + 2w = 36 6w = 36 w = 6 Plug the value of w into the second equation, l = 2(6) This will give you a length of 12. Since the area of rectangle is l * w, we just substitute the values in for length and width, l * w = 6 * 12 = 72 And that would be in square inches of course.
No, they are not equal. Say a rectangle is 3 x 2 = 6 sq in area Say another is 6 x 1 = 6 sq in area perimeter of first one is 2L + 2B = 10 perimeter of second one is 2L + 2B = 14
Yes, your statement is dimensionally correct. But your formula is incorrect, and possibly ambiguous. First, the perimeter is only a simple sum involving length and width IF the figure is a rectangle. Second, the perimeter of the rectangle is double what you have stated: P = 2L + 2W
the perimeter of a triangle is 86 inches. the largest side is four inches less than twice the smallest side. the third side is 10 inches longer than the smallest side. what is the length of each side?
The question cannot be answered. First, there is no information as to which measure of the rectangle is 14 units: a diameter, the perimeter, the area. Second, the answer to the question above does not provide sufficient information to answer the question.
Perimeters can be lower numbers than areas, andthey can be higher numbers than areas.Here's something really cool. Watch this one:I have two rectangles.One rectangle is 2 by 22. The other rectangle is 11 by 13.First rectangle:Perimeter is 48.Area is 44.Area is a lower number.Second rectangle:Perimeter is also 48, same as the first one.Area is 143.Perimeter is a much lower number.==> My two rectangles have the same perimeter but different areas.==> In the first one, the area is the lower number.==> In the second one, the perimeter is the lower number.
The diagonal of a rectangle divides the rectangle into two right triangles of equal area, with the length of the diagonal as the hypotenuse. The perimeter is twice the sum of the length and the width. Designating the length and width by l and w respectively, one obtains two equations: 2w + 2l = 68 and, from the Pythagorean theorem, w2 + l2 = 262. From the first of these equations, l = 34 -w. Substituting this relationship into the second equation yields w2 + (34 - w)2 = 676. Multiplying out the binomial square yields w2 + 342 - 68w + w2 = 676. Dividing by 2, adding the coefficients of w2, and reducing to standard form yields w2 -34w + 240 = 0. This can be factored into (w - 24)(w - 10) = 0, which can be true either for w = 24 or w = 10. The correct one of these can be chosen by noting that, from the definitions of length and width, l > w, which is not true for w = 24 -- if w were 24, the perimeter would be at least 4 X 24 = 96, which is inconsistent with the stated perimeter. Therefore, w = 10 and l = 24.
The equation is simple and straightforward, and can be expressed with one variable. Each side can be expressed in terms of the second side.
This question cannot be answered for two reasons. First, there is no such thing as a "standard rectangle". Second, a foot is a measure of length in 1-dimensional space while an acre is a measure of area in 2-dimensional space. The two measure different things and, according to basic principles of dimensional analysis, any attempt at conversion from one to the other is fundamentally flawed.
You have not said how many sides the figure has, I am assuming it is a rectangle so the perimeter is twice the sum of adjacent sides ie 5x by 2 = 10x. Make it easier for those who answer by stating your question fully and accurately.
This question beggars belief! To start with, 20x30 cannot be a square. The length and width of a square are the same. Second, there are no units associated with the dimensions of the rectangle (if rectangle it is). 20 in * 30 in, 20 ft * 30 ft, 20 miles * 30 miles? Third, inches is a measure of distance whereas 20 * 30 is a measure of area. The two things have different dimensions and measure different things. There is no simple way to convert from one to the other.
Five plus three equals 8, right? So the the second side would be eight inches. 17-8=9. so the first side is 5 inches less than the second side, which would make it 3 inches. The third side is +3 which would make it 6 inches. The equation is 3 inches + 6 inches+8 inches= 17 inches.
You can write equations for each of the two facts provided, then solve the equations. If you call the length "l", and the width "w", the facts are:3 more than...: w = 2l+3 perimeter: 2(l+w)=60 This is fairly easy to solve if you replace the first equation in the second (in the second equation, replace "w" by the expression that is on the right, in the first equation).
Inches per minute x 0.0167 = inches per second.
you wrote "Can A parallelogram is a rectangle?" which does not make sense. have you made a mistake and not realised or is English your second language or something.