Tuesday, April 1, 2014

Experimenting with Geogebra

Page 269, questions 1-4


This is what I did on Geogebra. First I made points on (0,0) and (3,0). After connecting them, I put the angle number that I wanted which was 34º. Then it automatically put the point R. After connecting them I saw that the RQ segment wasn't correct and it wasn't 90º, so I put a ray from QA, so that there would be an intersecting point from PB to QB. 
1a) QR = 4.0m
1b) PR = 7.2m





I started by making a scale, 1m = 10cm. I put a point at (0,0) and (7,9,0). Then I put the angle that measured 33º. Then I created a ray from point A to B, and made a new point right above point B which was called point C. I created a ray from BC, which later I found the point of intersection. 
The height of the flagpole was 5.13 cm, or 51.3m




First I created a scale, 1m = 1 cm. Since XY is the longest side I figured it is the hypothenuse. After plotting all the points, I connected all three together then I clicked on the 'angle' button and figured the angles. 
XYZ=44º
XZY=79º
YXZ=57º



Scale: 1cm = 100m
Then I put the points (0,0) and (4,0). I then put point C anywhere because I would have to move it anyways. I then connected the points together so that there was a triangular shape-ish. The next step was to input the angles, and after I did that I moved point C around so that the angles would correspond. I believe my answer is wrong because I moved point C around and it wasn't precise. 






How would this work if we didn't have Geogebra? What would our answers be like if we used protractors and rulers?
I believe the answers would be similar, because the only thing that Geogebra does is make the drawings more precise. If we did it on paper with protractors and ruler we would only have human mistakes, because the idea is the same. 


No comments:

Post a Comment