surface area of each piece would be 100 sq.inch
(surface area of cube 1 or 2 (either)) times 2 = (total surface area of two identical cubes)
Surface area of two cubes = 6 times [ (length of first cube's edge)2 + (length of second cube's edge)2 ]
depends on the two objects!
Each edge measures two units.
surface area of each piece would be 100 sq.inch
(surface area of cube 1 or 2 (either)) times 2 = (total surface area of two identical cubes)
Multiply two adjacent sides- that will give you the area of one face. Then multiply by six- a cube has 6 faces. That will give you the surface area of the cube.
Surface area of two cubes = 6 times [ (length of first cube's edge)2 + (length of second cube's edge)2 ]
Multiply two adjacent sides- that will give you the area of one face. Then multiply by six- a cube has 6 faces. That will give you the surface area of the cube.
V = 18.52 cm3
depends on the two objects!
This should be solved in two steps. 1) Use the formula for the area of a cube, and solve for the length of a side of the cube. 2) Using this length, it is easy to find out the volume, with the formula for the volume of a cube.
Because
Each edge measures two units.
Yes it will be less because if you take a net of a cube and find the surface area it would be for example 30cm2 and if it was cut in half it would be 15cm squared so its smallerCORRECT ANSWER:Neither. It will be more in area because although you have made two halves of a cube, you have added a new exposed side on each of the halves, thus making 2 sides the same size as the cube. It will lessen by half the area on 4 of the sides which are bisected. So you get the same area that you started with. The above formula is close, but did not account for the other half. Hooweestiki.==========================THE ANSWERS ABOVE ARE WRONG.==========================Here's why...First, picture a cube one inch on a side.Each side is one square inch; Six square inches total of SURFACE AREA .-------------------SCENARIO #1-------------------A slice (either vertical or horizontal) will add TWO (2) more sides, each being an additional square inch, for a sum total of eight (8) square inches.An increase of 2 sq. in. over the original six (6) sq. in. is an increase of 33 percent. So, for vertical or horizontal halving, the formula is, as follows:[ORIGINAL SURFACE AREA times 1.33]-------------------SCENARIO #2-------------------But if you halve the cube on a diagonal, the resultant new surfaces will be oblong, measuring 1" by 1.414" (the Square Root of two) adding almost another square inch of surface area.2 x ( 1 x 1.414) = 2.828 square inchesThe total SURFACE AREA is now 8.828 (when halved on the DIAGONAL).This is an INCREASE of 47.13333 percent.Resultant formula:[ORIGINAL SURFACE AREA times 1.4713]-------------------THEREFORE-------------------FINALLY, the answer to your question is somewhere between these two extremes, because your cut will be neither a perfect vertical cut, nor a perfect diagonal cut.
First, picture a cube one inch on a side. Each side is one square inch; Six square inches total of SURFACE AREA . ------------------- SCENARIO #1 ------------------- A slice (either vertical or horizontal) will add TWO (2) more sides, each being an additional square inch, for a sum total of eight (8) square inches. An increase of 2 sq. in. over the original six (6) sq. in. is an increase of 33 percent. So, for vertical or horizontal halving, the formula is, as follows: [ORIGINAL SURFACE AREA times 1.33] ------------------- SCENARIO #2 ------------------- But if you halve the cube on a diagonal, the resultant new surfaces will be oblong, measuring 1" by 1.414" (the Square Root of two) adding almost another square inch of surface area. 2 x ( 1 x 1.414) = 2.828 square inches The total SURFACE AREA is now 8.828 (when halved on the DIAGONAL). This is an INCREASE of 47.13333 percent. Resultant formula: [ORIGINAL SURFACE AREA times 1.4713] ------------------- THEREFORE ------------------- FINALLY, the answer to your question is somewhere between these two extremes, because your cut will be neither a perfect vertical cut, nor a perfect diagonal cut.