Length of hypotenuse v/s change in height of the opposite

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3












I have always struggled to understand mathematical concepts, and have a very different way of thinking about problems. I suspect this is a very simple problem, but its confusing me a great deal.



I made a right triangle where the "opposite" side was $10$ and the "adjacent side" was $60$. I then kept increasing the height of the opposite side by $10$ and measuring the length of the hypotenuse. This rate of change in the hypotenuse length is not constant and reminds me of a sine wave because of its non-linear acceleration.



However, the rate of change appears to become linear as the graph progresses.



I just want to have an intuition for why the rate of change the length of the hypotenuse is not linear, and if there is one or several different ways I could visualize this to have a better intuition for whats going on.



Graph & Triangle: enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 4




    if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
    – lulu
    Jul 18 '15 at 16:38














up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3












I have always struggled to understand mathematical concepts, and have a very different way of thinking about problems. I suspect this is a very simple problem, but its confusing me a great deal.



I made a right triangle where the "opposite" side was $10$ and the "adjacent side" was $60$. I then kept increasing the height of the opposite side by $10$ and measuring the length of the hypotenuse. This rate of change in the hypotenuse length is not constant and reminds me of a sine wave because of its non-linear acceleration.



However, the rate of change appears to become linear as the graph progresses.



I just want to have an intuition for why the rate of change the length of the hypotenuse is not linear, and if there is one or several different ways I could visualize this to have a better intuition for whats going on.



Graph & Triangle: enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question



















  • 4




    if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
    – lulu
    Jul 18 '15 at 16:38












up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3









up vote
6
down vote

favorite
3






3





I have always struggled to understand mathematical concepts, and have a very different way of thinking about problems. I suspect this is a very simple problem, but its confusing me a great deal.



I made a right triangle where the "opposite" side was $10$ and the "adjacent side" was $60$. I then kept increasing the height of the opposite side by $10$ and measuring the length of the hypotenuse. This rate of change in the hypotenuse length is not constant and reminds me of a sine wave because of its non-linear acceleration.



However, the rate of change appears to become linear as the graph progresses.



I just want to have an intuition for why the rate of change the length of the hypotenuse is not linear, and if there is one or several different ways I could visualize this to have a better intuition for whats going on.



Graph & Triangle: enter image description here










share|cite|improve this question















I have always struggled to understand mathematical concepts, and have a very different way of thinking about problems. I suspect this is a very simple problem, but its confusing me a great deal.



I made a right triangle where the "opposite" side was $10$ and the "adjacent side" was $60$. I then kept increasing the height of the opposite side by $10$ and measuring the length of the hypotenuse. This rate of change in the hypotenuse length is not constant and reminds me of a sine wave because of its non-linear acceleration.



However, the rate of change appears to become linear as the graph progresses.



I just want to have an intuition for why the rate of change the length of the hypotenuse is not linear, and if there is one or several different ways I could visualize this to have a better intuition for whats going on.



Graph & Triangle: enter image description here







trigonometry






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Jul 20 '15 at 10:00









Zain Patel

15.6k51949




15.6k51949










asked Jul 18 '15 at 16:34









Cggart

4215




4215







  • 4




    if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
    – lulu
    Jul 18 '15 at 16:38












  • 4




    if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
    – lulu
    Jul 18 '15 at 16:38







4




4




if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
– lulu
Jul 18 '15 at 16:38




if the length of the opposite side is x the hypotenuse is $sqrtx^2 + 60^2$. For large x, this is well approximated by x hence the linearity as x gets big.
– lulu
Jul 18 '15 at 16:38










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
3
down vote



accepted










Imagine a right-angle triangle with opposite side of $x$, that you'll keep changing. An adjacent side $a$ a constant that you'll leave alone and fix. Then the length of the hypotenuse is given by $$sqrtx^2 + a$$



Now, as $x$ grows very large, the constant $a$ becomes kind of irrelevant. Think of adding $10$ to $20,000,000,000,000$ it'll hardly make a difference to the calculuations, so we can say that $$sqrtx^2 + a approx sqrtx^2 = x$$
for large $x$. For the smaller values of $x$, that extra $+a$ will have quite an impact on the size of the $x^2 + a$ term.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    3
    down vote













    Let me try a slightly different intuition.



    Suppose you are out in the open somewhere and you see a hungry lion
    $60$ meters west of you and $10$ meters south.
    The lion runs faster than you, so your only hope for survival is to
    put as much distance between you and the lion as quickly as possible
    before it starts to chase you,
    and hope that a helicopter will arrive
    and rescue you before the lion catches you.



    (If you prefer, substitute "velociraptor" or "zombie" everywhere you
    see "lion" in this answer.)



    At the start of this scenario, you and the lion are at vertices of a right
    triangle whose $60$-meter leg is adjacent to the lion and whose
    $10$-meter leg is adjacent to you:



    enter image description here



    Now it should be fairly evident from the picture that while running due
    north will put some extra distance between you and the lion,
    it does not increase the distance nearly as quickly as running
    in the direction labeled "best escape route" (in the same direction as
    the hypotenuse of the triangle, slightly north of east).



    Your calculations should bear out the fact that the distance to the lion
    (the length of the hypotenuse) does not grow nearly as fast as the
    distance you have run.



    But suppose you were already $600$ meters north of the lion, not $10$,
    at the moment you see each other.
    This is the situation in the diagram below:



    enter image description here



    The "best escape route," which will maximize the distance you put
    between you and the lion, is still in the direction of the hypotenuse,
    but now that direction is nearly (though not quite) due north.
    So if you happen to run due north, you will not get quite as far from
    the lion as you might, but you will get very nearly as far as possible
    as quickly as possible.



    The "run due north" strategy gets better and better the farther north
    you start, because the difference between due north and "directly away
    from the lion" gets less and less. But you can never get away faster
    than running directly away, so that is the limit on how fast the
    "run due north" strategy can put distance between you and the lion.



    In other words, the rate of change of the hypotenuse starts small,
    increases as you increase the length of the leg,
    but eventually starts to approach a maximum value.
    Therefore it cannot increase linearly.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
      – raddevus
      May 11 '16 at 19:38

















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    Have a look at the Pythagorian theorem. It solves the problem of your hypotenuse.
    Furthermore the equation for the length of the hypotenuse as a function of one of the other sides (whichever you choose) is of second degree. Hence it can not be linear.The resemblence with trigonometric formulas depends (probably) on the fact that several of those formulas are rewritings of the Pythagorian theorem,with sin x and cos x for the two shorter sides.






    share|cite|improve this answer




















    • OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
      – BusyAnt
      Jul 20 '15 at 10:11

















    up vote
    0
    down vote













    You have drawn a hyperbola. At large values ( x >> 60 ) the slope tends to a constant, to that of its asymptote, so it is becoming straight quite fast.






    share|cite|improve this answer



























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      We can always try a little tad o' the method o' fluxions (what Newton called calculus):



      Letting the adjacent side have length $a$, the opposite side length $x$, and the hypoteneuse length $h$, we can, in concert with Gilbert and Sullivan's Modern Major General, deploy one of his "many cheerful facts about the square of the hypoteneuse", viz., the Pythagorean theorem :



      $h^2 = a^2 + x^2; tag1$



      then, differentiating with respect to $x$,



      $2hdfracdhdx = 2x, tag2$



      or



      $dfracdhdx = dfracxh; tag3$



      since, from (1),



      $h = sqrta^2 + x^2, tag4$



      (3) becomes



      $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2; tag5$



      and since ourselves, like our friend the Major, are "acquainted with methods mathematical", and "understand equations both the simple and quadratical", we can do a little algebraic fiddling with (5):



      $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2 = dfracxx sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1$
      $= dfrac1sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1 to 1 tag6$



      as $x to infty$, since $a/x to 0$. We see that the rate of change of $h$ with respect to $x$ approaches $1$ with ever-increasing $x$, i.e., $h(x)$ becomes more and more linear the bigger $x$ gets; this in keeping with our OP Cggart's graph, the slope of which is indeed very close to $1$ for even moderately large $x$. One can also note that
      (3) can be cast in the form



      $dfracdhdx = sin theta, tag7$



      where $theta$ is the angle 'twixt the side of length $a$ and the hypoteneuse; as $x to infty$, $theta to pi/2$, so $sin theta to 1$, consistent with what we have seen so far. And (7) also allows us to see the sine-like behavior near $x = 0$, as Cggart has observed.



      These things being said, I must rush off to a meeting with the Major, who has telegraphed me that "about binomial theorem he is teeming with a lot of news".



      With thanks to Gilbert, Sullivan, Pythagoras, the Major, and last but by no means least, Sir Isaac.






      share|cite|improve this answer





























        up vote
        -1
        down vote













        This is a very good question and your diagram is helping me to understand a surveying problem im trying to solve, but anyhow i think i might be able to explain this a little bit, i hope haha.



        Without getting into the math it might help to look at the problem by understanding the absolute limits of the triangle you are describing ( a right triangle with a fixed horizantal length) by finding the absolute limits of a geometric shape you will see that all real points that are obtainable fit within the absolute limits. I hope this makes sense. Absolute limits are 0 and infinty both are un-attainable limits and everything must fit inside(or around in the case of zero) these limits. Make sense?



        So because of these two conditions you have created limits for the triangle. When we take the two variables ( vertical length and hypotenuse length) to their limits ( infinity) we see that they both become infinite or in other words when the vertical length goes to infinity the hypotenuse goes to infinity at the same time. This means that the vertical length is catching up to the hypotenuse length as the vertical gets longer ( hence not a linear ratio) until the vertical length reaches infinity and then it will equal the hypotenuse length of infinity. Otherwise the vertical length is always less than the hypotenuse because infinty is un attainable. This is why your graph stables out vertical length is catching up to hypotenuse length the longer it gets.



        Now, look at it another way.
        If you take the vertical length to 0 you will see that the hypotenuse reaches a new limit of?..... the adjacent side length. And now when the vertical length is 0 it is no longer a triangle it is just a line. As soon as the vertical length is anything greater than zero you will see that the hypotenuse becomes just greater than the adjacent length but it will never be less than or equal to the adjacent length or else you wont have a right triangle.



        Another limit of this triangle exist within the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent side. This angle can go from anything greater than 0 to anything less than 90 degrees. It will never be 0 or 90 degrees or else again the triangle breaks down and becomes a line. Even as that vertical line goes onto infinty the angle between the adjacent and hypotenuse will only approach 90 degrees but will never be 90 degrees.



        I hope this sheds some practical light on your mathmatical question.



        Cheers!






        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
          );



          );













           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1365746%2flength-of-hypotenuse-v-s-change-in-height-of-the-opposite%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest






























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes








          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          up vote
          3
          down vote



          accepted










          Imagine a right-angle triangle with opposite side of $x$, that you'll keep changing. An adjacent side $a$ a constant that you'll leave alone and fix. Then the length of the hypotenuse is given by $$sqrtx^2 + a$$



          Now, as $x$ grows very large, the constant $a$ becomes kind of irrelevant. Think of adding $10$ to $20,000,000,000,000$ it'll hardly make a difference to the calculuations, so we can say that $$sqrtx^2 + a approx sqrtx^2 = x$$
          for large $x$. For the smaller values of $x$, that extra $+a$ will have quite an impact on the size of the $x^2 + a$ term.






          share|cite|improve this answer
























            up vote
            3
            down vote



            accepted










            Imagine a right-angle triangle with opposite side of $x$, that you'll keep changing. An adjacent side $a$ a constant that you'll leave alone and fix. Then the length of the hypotenuse is given by $$sqrtx^2 + a$$



            Now, as $x$ grows very large, the constant $a$ becomes kind of irrelevant. Think of adding $10$ to $20,000,000,000,000$ it'll hardly make a difference to the calculuations, so we can say that $$sqrtx^2 + a approx sqrtx^2 = x$$
            for large $x$. For the smaller values of $x$, that extra $+a$ will have quite an impact on the size of the $x^2 + a$ term.






            share|cite|improve this answer






















              up vote
              3
              down vote



              accepted







              up vote
              3
              down vote



              accepted






              Imagine a right-angle triangle with opposite side of $x$, that you'll keep changing. An adjacent side $a$ a constant that you'll leave alone and fix. Then the length of the hypotenuse is given by $$sqrtx^2 + a$$



              Now, as $x$ grows very large, the constant $a$ becomes kind of irrelevant. Think of adding $10$ to $20,000,000,000,000$ it'll hardly make a difference to the calculuations, so we can say that $$sqrtx^2 + a approx sqrtx^2 = x$$
              for large $x$. For the smaller values of $x$, that extra $+a$ will have quite an impact on the size of the $x^2 + a$ term.






              share|cite|improve this answer












              Imagine a right-angle triangle with opposite side of $x$, that you'll keep changing. An adjacent side $a$ a constant that you'll leave alone and fix. Then the length of the hypotenuse is given by $$sqrtx^2 + a$$



              Now, as $x$ grows very large, the constant $a$ becomes kind of irrelevant. Think of adding $10$ to $20,000,000,000,000$ it'll hardly make a difference to the calculuations, so we can say that $$sqrtx^2 + a approx sqrtx^2 = x$$
              for large $x$. For the smaller values of $x$, that extra $+a$ will have quite an impact on the size of the $x^2 + a$ term.







              share|cite|improve this answer












              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer










              answered Jul 18 '15 at 16:52









              Zain Patel

              15.6k51949




              15.6k51949




















                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote













                  Let me try a slightly different intuition.



                  Suppose you are out in the open somewhere and you see a hungry lion
                  $60$ meters west of you and $10$ meters south.
                  The lion runs faster than you, so your only hope for survival is to
                  put as much distance between you and the lion as quickly as possible
                  before it starts to chase you,
                  and hope that a helicopter will arrive
                  and rescue you before the lion catches you.



                  (If you prefer, substitute "velociraptor" or "zombie" everywhere you
                  see "lion" in this answer.)



                  At the start of this scenario, you and the lion are at vertices of a right
                  triangle whose $60$-meter leg is adjacent to the lion and whose
                  $10$-meter leg is adjacent to you:



                  enter image description here



                  Now it should be fairly evident from the picture that while running due
                  north will put some extra distance between you and the lion,
                  it does not increase the distance nearly as quickly as running
                  in the direction labeled "best escape route" (in the same direction as
                  the hypotenuse of the triangle, slightly north of east).



                  Your calculations should bear out the fact that the distance to the lion
                  (the length of the hypotenuse) does not grow nearly as fast as the
                  distance you have run.



                  But suppose you were already $600$ meters north of the lion, not $10$,
                  at the moment you see each other.
                  This is the situation in the diagram below:



                  enter image description here



                  The "best escape route," which will maximize the distance you put
                  between you and the lion, is still in the direction of the hypotenuse,
                  but now that direction is nearly (though not quite) due north.
                  So if you happen to run due north, you will not get quite as far from
                  the lion as you might, but you will get very nearly as far as possible
                  as quickly as possible.



                  The "run due north" strategy gets better and better the farther north
                  you start, because the difference between due north and "directly away
                  from the lion" gets less and less. But you can never get away faster
                  than running directly away, so that is the limit on how fast the
                  "run due north" strategy can put distance between you and the lion.



                  In other words, the rate of change of the hypotenuse starts small,
                  increases as you increase the length of the leg,
                  but eventually starts to approach a maximum value.
                  Therefore it cannot increase linearly.






                  share|cite|improve this answer




















                  • That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                    – raddevus
                    May 11 '16 at 19:38














                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote













                  Let me try a slightly different intuition.



                  Suppose you are out in the open somewhere and you see a hungry lion
                  $60$ meters west of you and $10$ meters south.
                  The lion runs faster than you, so your only hope for survival is to
                  put as much distance between you and the lion as quickly as possible
                  before it starts to chase you,
                  and hope that a helicopter will arrive
                  and rescue you before the lion catches you.



                  (If you prefer, substitute "velociraptor" or "zombie" everywhere you
                  see "lion" in this answer.)



                  At the start of this scenario, you and the lion are at vertices of a right
                  triangle whose $60$-meter leg is adjacent to the lion and whose
                  $10$-meter leg is adjacent to you:



                  enter image description here



                  Now it should be fairly evident from the picture that while running due
                  north will put some extra distance between you and the lion,
                  it does not increase the distance nearly as quickly as running
                  in the direction labeled "best escape route" (in the same direction as
                  the hypotenuse of the triangle, slightly north of east).



                  Your calculations should bear out the fact that the distance to the lion
                  (the length of the hypotenuse) does not grow nearly as fast as the
                  distance you have run.



                  But suppose you were already $600$ meters north of the lion, not $10$,
                  at the moment you see each other.
                  This is the situation in the diagram below:



                  enter image description here



                  The "best escape route," which will maximize the distance you put
                  between you and the lion, is still in the direction of the hypotenuse,
                  but now that direction is nearly (though not quite) due north.
                  So if you happen to run due north, you will not get quite as far from
                  the lion as you might, but you will get very nearly as far as possible
                  as quickly as possible.



                  The "run due north" strategy gets better and better the farther north
                  you start, because the difference between due north and "directly away
                  from the lion" gets less and less. But you can never get away faster
                  than running directly away, so that is the limit on how fast the
                  "run due north" strategy can put distance between you and the lion.



                  In other words, the rate of change of the hypotenuse starts small,
                  increases as you increase the length of the leg,
                  but eventually starts to approach a maximum value.
                  Therefore it cannot increase linearly.






                  share|cite|improve this answer




















                  • That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                    – raddevus
                    May 11 '16 at 19:38












                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  3
                  down vote









                  Let me try a slightly different intuition.



                  Suppose you are out in the open somewhere and you see a hungry lion
                  $60$ meters west of you and $10$ meters south.
                  The lion runs faster than you, so your only hope for survival is to
                  put as much distance between you and the lion as quickly as possible
                  before it starts to chase you,
                  and hope that a helicopter will arrive
                  and rescue you before the lion catches you.



                  (If you prefer, substitute "velociraptor" or "zombie" everywhere you
                  see "lion" in this answer.)



                  At the start of this scenario, you and the lion are at vertices of a right
                  triangle whose $60$-meter leg is adjacent to the lion and whose
                  $10$-meter leg is adjacent to you:



                  enter image description here



                  Now it should be fairly evident from the picture that while running due
                  north will put some extra distance between you and the lion,
                  it does not increase the distance nearly as quickly as running
                  in the direction labeled "best escape route" (in the same direction as
                  the hypotenuse of the triangle, slightly north of east).



                  Your calculations should bear out the fact that the distance to the lion
                  (the length of the hypotenuse) does not grow nearly as fast as the
                  distance you have run.



                  But suppose you were already $600$ meters north of the lion, not $10$,
                  at the moment you see each other.
                  This is the situation in the diagram below:



                  enter image description here



                  The "best escape route," which will maximize the distance you put
                  between you and the lion, is still in the direction of the hypotenuse,
                  but now that direction is nearly (though not quite) due north.
                  So if you happen to run due north, you will not get quite as far from
                  the lion as you might, but you will get very nearly as far as possible
                  as quickly as possible.



                  The "run due north" strategy gets better and better the farther north
                  you start, because the difference between due north and "directly away
                  from the lion" gets less and less. But you can never get away faster
                  than running directly away, so that is the limit on how fast the
                  "run due north" strategy can put distance between you and the lion.



                  In other words, the rate of change of the hypotenuse starts small,
                  increases as you increase the length of the leg,
                  but eventually starts to approach a maximum value.
                  Therefore it cannot increase linearly.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Let me try a slightly different intuition.



                  Suppose you are out in the open somewhere and you see a hungry lion
                  $60$ meters west of you and $10$ meters south.
                  The lion runs faster than you, so your only hope for survival is to
                  put as much distance between you and the lion as quickly as possible
                  before it starts to chase you,
                  and hope that a helicopter will arrive
                  and rescue you before the lion catches you.



                  (If you prefer, substitute "velociraptor" or "zombie" everywhere you
                  see "lion" in this answer.)



                  At the start of this scenario, you and the lion are at vertices of a right
                  triangle whose $60$-meter leg is adjacent to the lion and whose
                  $10$-meter leg is adjacent to you:



                  enter image description here



                  Now it should be fairly evident from the picture that while running due
                  north will put some extra distance between you and the lion,
                  it does not increase the distance nearly as quickly as running
                  in the direction labeled "best escape route" (in the same direction as
                  the hypotenuse of the triangle, slightly north of east).



                  Your calculations should bear out the fact that the distance to the lion
                  (the length of the hypotenuse) does not grow nearly as fast as the
                  distance you have run.



                  But suppose you were already $600$ meters north of the lion, not $10$,
                  at the moment you see each other.
                  This is the situation in the diagram below:



                  enter image description here



                  The "best escape route," which will maximize the distance you put
                  between you and the lion, is still in the direction of the hypotenuse,
                  but now that direction is nearly (though not quite) due north.
                  So if you happen to run due north, you will not get quite as far from
                  the lion as you might, but you will get very nearly as far as possible
                  as quickly as possible.



                  The "run due north" strategy gets better and better the farther north
                  you start, because the difference between due north and "directly away
                  from the lion" gets less and less. But you can never get away faster
                  than running directly away, so that is the limit on how fast the
                  "run due north" strategy can put distance between you and the lion.



                  In other words, the rate of change of the hypotenuse starts small,
                  increases as you increase the length of the leg,
                  but eventually starts to approach a maximum value.
                  Therefore it cannot increase linearly.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jul 19 '15 at 14:21









                  David K

                  50.9k340113




                  50.9k340113











                  • That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                    – raddevus
                    May 11 '16 at 19:38
















                  • That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                    – raddevus
                    May 11 '16 at 19:38















                  That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                  – raddevus
                  May 11 '16 at 19:38




                  That's a great answer using intuition and a very cool example. Thanks for writing it up.
                  – raddevus
                  May 11 '16 at 19:38










                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  Have a look at the Pythagorian theorem. It solves the problem of your hypotenuse.
                  Furthermore the equation for the length of the hypotenuse as a function of one of the other sides (whichever you choose) is of second degree. Hence it can not be linear.The resemblence with trigonometric formulas depends (probably) on the fact that several of those formulas are rewritings of the Pythagorian theorem,with sin x and cos x for the two shorter sides.






                  share|cite|improve this answer




















                  • OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                    – BusyAnt
                    Jul 20 '15 at 10:11














                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  Have a look at the Pythagorian theorem. It solves the problem of your hypotenuse.
                  Furthermore the equation for the length of the hypotenuse as a function of one of the other sides (whichever you choose) is of second degree. Hence it can not be linear.The resemblence with trigonometric formulas depends (probably) on the fact that several of those formulas are rewritings of the Pythagorian theorem,with sin x and cos x for the two shorter sides.






                  share|cite|improve this answer




















                  • OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                    – BusyAnt
                    Jul 20 '15 at 10:11












                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote









                  Have a look at the Pythagorian theorem. It solves the problem of your hypotenuse.
                  Furthermore the equation for the length of the hypotenuse as a function of one of the other sides (whichever you choose) is of second degree. Hence it can not be linear.The resemblence with trigonometric formulas depends (probably) on the fact that several of those formulas are rewritings of the Pythagorian theorem,with sin x and cos x for the two shorter sides.






                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  Have a look at the Pythagorian theorem. It solves the problem of your hypotenuse.
                  Furthermore the equation for the length of the hypotenuse as a function of one of the other sides (whichever you choose) is of second degree. Hence it can not be linear.The resemblence with trigonometric formulas depends (probably) on the fact that several of those formulas are rewritings of the Pythagorian theorem,with sin x and cos x for the two shorter sides.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Jul 18 '15 at 16:51









                  Tom J

                  572




                  572











                  • OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                    – BusyAnt
                    Jul 20 '15 at 10:11
















                  • OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                    – BusyAnt
                    Jul 20 '15 at 10:11















                  OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                  – BusyAnt
                  Jul 20 '15 at 10:11




                  OP asked for an intuitive reasoning, not basic theorems
                  – BusyAnt
                  Jul 20 '15 at 10:11










                  up vote
                  0
                  down vote













                  You have drawn a hyperbola. At large values ( x >> 60 ) the slope tends to a constant, to that of its asymptote, so it is becoming straight quite fast.






                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                    up vote
                    0
                    down vote













                    You have drawn a hyperbola. At large values ( x >> 60 ) the slope tends to a constant, to that of its asymptote, so it is becoming straight quite fast.






                    share|cite|improve this answer






















                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote










                      up vote
                      0
                      down vote









                      You have drawn a hyperbola. At large values ( x >> 60 ) the slope tends to a constant, to that of its asymptote, so it is becoming straight quite fast.






                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      You have drawn a hyperbola. At large values ( x >> 60 ) the slope tends to a constant, to that of its asymptote, so it is becoming straight quite fast.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Jul 18 '15 at 16:55









                      Narasimham

                      20.4k52158




                      20.4k52158




















                          up vote
                          0
                          down vote













                          We can always try a little tad o' the method o' fluxions (what Newton called calculus):



                          Letting the adjacent side have length $a$, the opposite side length $x$, and the hypoteneuse length $h$, we can, in concert with Gilbert and Sullivan's Modern Major General, deploy one of his "many cheerful facts about the square of the hypoteneuse", viz., the Pythagorean theorem :



                          $h^2 = a^2 + x^2; tag1$



                          then, differentiating with respect to $x$,



                          $2hdfracdhdx = 2x, tag2$



                          or



                          $dfracdhdx = dfracxh; tag3$



                          since, from (1),



                          $h = sqrta^2 + x^2, tag4$



                          (3) becomes



                          $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2; tag5$



                          and since ourselves, like our friend the Major, are "acquainted with methods mathematical", and "understand equations both the simple and quadratical", we can do a little algebraic fiddling with (5):



                          $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2 = dfracxx sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1$
                          $= dfrac1sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1 to 1 tag6$



                          as $x to infty$, since $a/x to 0$. We see that the rate of change of $h$ with respect to $x$ approaches $1$ with ever-increasing $x$, i.e., $h(x)$ becomes more and more linear the bigger $x$ gets; this in keeping with our OP Cggart's graph, the slope of which is indeed very close to $1$ for even moderately large $x$. One can also note that
                          (3) can be cast in the form



                          $dfracdhdx = sin theta, tag7$



                          where $theta$ is the angle 'twixt the side of length $a$ and the hypoteneuse; as $x to infty$, $theta to pi/2$, so $sin theta to 1$, consistent with what we have seen so far. And (7) also allows us to see the sine-like behavior near $x = 0$, as Cggart has observed.



                          These things being said, I must rush off to a meeting with the Major, who has telegraphed me that "about binomial theorem he is teeming with a lot of news".



                          With thanks to Gilbert, Sullivan, Pythagoras, the Major, and last but by no means least, Sir Isaac.






                          share|cite|improve this answer


























                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            We can always try a little tad o' the method o' fluxions (what Newton called calculus):



                            Letting the adjacent side have length $a$, the opposite side length $x$, and the hypoteneuse length $h$, we can, in concert with Gilbert and Sullivan's Modern Major General, deploy one of his "many cheerful facts about the square of the hypoteneuse", viz., the Pythagorean theorem :



                            $h^2 = a^2 + x^2; tag1$



                            then, differentiating with respect to $x$,



                            $2hdfracdhdx = 2x, tag2$



                            or



                            $dfracdhdx = dfracxh; tag3$



                            since, from (1),



                            $h = sqrta^2 + x^2, tag4$



                            (3) becomes



                            $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2; tag5$



                            and since ourselves, like our friend the Major, are "acquainted with methods mathematical", and "understand equations both the simple and quadratical", we can do a little algebraic fiddling with (5):



                            $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2 = dfracxx sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1$
                            $= dfrac1sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1 to 1 tag6$



                            as $x to infty$, since $a/x to 0$. We see that the rate of change of $h$ with respect to $x$ approaches $1$ with ever-increasing $x$, i.e., $h(x)$ becomes more and more linear the bigger $x$ gets; this in keeping with our OP Cggart's graph, the slope of which is indeed very close to $1$ for even moderately large $x$. One can also note that
                            (3) can be cast in the form



                            $dfracdhdx = sin theta, tag7$



                            where $theta$ is the angle 'twixt the side of length $a$ and the hypoteneuse; as $x to infty$, $theta to pi/2$, so $sin theta to 1$, consistent with what we have seen so far. And (7) also allows us to see the sine-like behavior near $x = 0$, as Cggart has observed.



                            These things being said, I must rush off to a meeting with the Major, who has telegraphed me that "about binomial theorem he is teeming with a lot of news".



                            With thanks to Gilbert, Sullivan, Pythagoras, the Major, and last but by no means least, Sir Isaac.






                            share|cite|improve this answer
























                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote










                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote









                              We can always try a little tad o' the method o' fluxions (what Newton called calculus):



                              Letting the adjacent side have length $a$, the opposite side length $x$, and the hypoteneuse length $h$, we can, in concert with Gilbert and Sullivan's Modern Major General, deploy one of his "many cheerful facts about the square of the hypoteneuse", viz., the Pythagorean theorem :



                              $h^2 = a^2 + x^2; tag1$



                              then, differentiating with respect to $x$,



                              $2hdfracdhdx = 2x, tag2$



                              or



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxh; tag3$



                              since, from (1),



                              $h = sqrta^2 + x^2, tag4$



                              (3) becomes



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2; tag5$



                              and since ourselves, like our friend the Major, are "acquainted with methods mathematical", and "understand equations both the simple and quadratical", we can do a little algebraic fiddling with (5):



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2 = dfracxx sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1$
                              $= dfrac1sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1 to 1 tag6$



                              as $x to infty$, since $a/x to 0$. We see that the rate of change of $h$ with respect to $x$ approaches $1$ with ever-increasing $x$, i.e., $h(x)$ becomes more and more linear the bigger $x$ gets; this in keeping with our OP Cggart's graph, the slope of which is indeed very close to $1$ for even moderately large $x$. One can also note that
                              (3) can be cast in the form



                              $dfracdhdx = sin theta, tag7$



                              where $theta$ is the angle 'twixt the side of length $a$ and the hypoteneuse; as $x to infty$, $theta to pi/2$, so $sin theta to 1$, consistent with what we have seen so far. And (7) also allows us to see the sine-like behavior near $x = 0$, as Cggart has observed.



                              These things being said, I must rush off to a meeting with the Major, who has telegraphed me that "about binomial theorem he is teeming with a lot of news".



                              With thanks to Gilbert, Sullivan, Pythagoras, the Major, and last but by no means least, Sir Isaac.






                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              We can always try a little tad o' the method o' fluxions (what Newton called calculus):



                              Letting the adjacent side have length $a$, the opposite side length $x$, and the hypoteneuse length $h$, we can, in concert with Gilbert and Sullivan's Modern Major General, deploy one of his "many cheerful facts about the square of the hypoteneuse", viz., the Pythagorean theorem :



                              $h^2 = a^2 + x^2; tag1$



                              then, differentiating with respect to $x$,



                              $2hdfracdhdx = 2x, tag2$



                              or



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxh; tag3$



                              since, from (1),



                              $h = sqrta^2 + x^2, tag4$



                              (3) becomes



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2; tag5$



                              and since ourselves, like our friend the Major, are "acquainted with methods mathematical", and "understand equations both the simple and quadratical", we can do a little algebraic fiddling with (5):



                              $dfracdhdx = dfracxsqrta^2 + x^2 = dfracxx sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1$
                              $= dfrac1sqrt(a/x)^2 + 1 to 1 tag6$



                              as $x to infty$, since $a/x to 0$. We see that the rate of change of $h$ with respect to $x$ approaches $1$ with ever-increasing $x$, i.e., $h(x)$ becomes more and more linear the bigger $x$ gets; this in keeping with our OP Cggart's graph, the slope of which is indeed very close to $1$ for even moderately large $x$. One can also note that
                              (3) can be cast in the form



                              $dfracdhdx = sin theta, tag7$



                              where $theta$ is the angle 'twixt the side of length $a$ and the hypoteneuse; as $x to infty$, $theta to pi/2$, so $sin theta to 1$, consistent with what we have seen so far. And (7) also allows us to see the sine-like behavior near $x = 0$, as Cggart has observed.



                              These things being said, I must rush off to a meeting with the Major, who has telegraphed me that "about binomial theorem he is teeming with a lot of news".



                              With thanks to Gilbert, Sullivan, Pythagoras, the Major, and last but by no means least, Sir Isaac.







                              share|cite|improve this answer














                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer








                              edited Jul 18 '15 at 17:46

























                              answered Jul 18 '15 at 17:39









                              Robert Lewis

                              41.3k22759




                              41.3k22759




















                                  up vote
                                  -1
                                  down vote













                                  This is a very good question and your diagram is helping me to understand a surveying problem im trying to solve, but anyhow i think i might be able to explain this a little bit, i hope haha.



                                  Without getting into the math it might help to look at the problem by understanding the absolute limits of the triangle you are describing ( a right triangle with a fixed horizantal length) by finding the absolute limits of a geometric shape you will see that all real points that are obtainable fit within the absolute limits. I hope this makes sense. Absolute limits are 0 and infinty both are un-attainable limits and everything must fit inside(or around in the case of zero) these limits. Make sense?



                                  So because of these two conditions you have created limits for the triangle. When we take the two variables ( vertical length and hypotenuse length) to their limits ( infinity) we see that they both become infinite or in other words when the vertical length goes to infinity the hypotenuse goes to infinity at the same time. This means that the vertical length is catching up to the hypotenuse length as the vertical gets longer ( hence not a linear ratio) until the vertical length reaches infinity and then it will equal the hypotenuse length of infinity. Otherwise the vertical length is always less than the hypotenuse because infinty is un attainable. This is why your graph stables out vertical length is catching up to hypotenuse length the longer it gets.



                                  Now, look at it another way.
                                  If you take the vertical length to 0 you will see that the hypotenuse reaches a new limit of?..... the adjacent side length. And now when the vertical length is 0 it is no longer a triangle it is just a line. As soon as the vertical length is anything greater than zero you will see that the hypotenuse becomes just greater than the adjacent length but it will never be less than or equal to the adjacent length or else you wont have a right triangle.



                                  Another limit of this triangle exist within the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent side. This angle can go from anything greater than 0 to anything less than 90 degrees. It will never be 0 or 90 degrees or else again the triangle breaks down and becomes a line. Even as that vertical line goes onto infinty the angle between the adjacent and hypotenuse will only approach 90 degrees but will never be 90 degrees.



                                  I hope this sheds some practical light on your mathmatical question.



                                  Cheers!






                                  share|cite|improve this answer
























                                    up vote
                                    -1
                                    down vote













                                    This is a very good question and your diagram is helping me to understand a surveying problem im trying to solve, but anyhow i think i might be able to explain this a little bit, i hope haha.



                                    Without getting into the math it might help to look at the problem by understanding the absolute limits of the triangle you are describing ( a right triangle with a fixed horizantal length) by finding the absolute limits of a geometric shape you will see that all real points that are obtainable fit within the absolute limits. I hope this makes sense. Absolute limits are 0 and infinty both are un-attainable limits and everything must fit inside(or around in the case of zero) these limits. Make sense?



                                    So because of these two conditions you have created limits for the triangle. When we take the two variables ( vertical length and hypotenuse length) to their limits ( infinity) we see that they both become infinite or in other words when the vertical length goes to infinity the hypotenuse goes to infinity at the same time. This means that the vertical length is catching up to the hypotenuse length as the vertical gets longer ( hence not a linear ratio) until the vertical length reaches infinity and then it will equal the hypotenuse length of infinity. Otherwise the vertical length is always less than the hypotenuse because infinty is un attainable. This is why your graph stables out vertical length is catching up to hypotenuse length the longer it gets.



                                    Now, look at it another way.
                                    If you take the vertical length to 0 you will see that the hypotenuse reaches a new limit of?..... the adjacent side length. And now when the vertical length is 0 it is no longer a triangle it is just a line. As soon as the vertical length is anything greater than zero you will see that the hypotenuse becomes just greater than the adjacent length but it will never be less than or equal to the adjacent length or else you wont have a right triangle.



                                    Another limit of this triangle exist within the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent side. This angle can go from anything greater than 0 to anything less than 90 degrees. It will never be 0 or 90 degrees or else again the triangle breaks down and becomes a line. Even as that vertical line goes onto infinty the angle between the adjacent and hypotenuse will only approach 90 degrees but will never be 90 degrees.



                                    I hope this sheds some practical light on your mathmatical question.



                                    Cheers!






                                    share|cite|improve this answer






















                                      up vote
                                      -1
                                      down vote










                                      up vote
                                      -1
                                      down vote









                                      This is a very good question and your diagram is helping me to understand a surveying problem im trying to solve, but anyhow i think i might be able to explain this a little bit, i hope haha.



                                      Without getting into the math it might help to look at the problem by understanding the absolute limits of the triangle you are describing ( a right triangle with a fixed horizantal length) by finding the absolute limits of a geometric shape you will see that all real points that are obtainable fit within the absolute limits. I hope this makes sense. Absolute limits are 0 and infinty both are un-attainable limits and everything must fit inside(or around in the case of zero) these limits. Make sense?



                                      So because of these two conditions you have created limits for the triangle. When we take the two variables ( vertical length and hypotenuse length) to their limits ( infinity) we see that they both become infinite or in other words when the vertical length goes to infinity the hypotenuse goes to infinity at the same time. This means that the vertical length is catching up to the hypotenuse length as the vertical gets longer ( hence not a linear ratio) until the vertical length reaches infinity and then it will equal the hypotenuse length of infinity. Otherwise the vertical length is always less than the hypotenuse because infinty is un attainable. This is why your graph stables out vertical length is catching up to hypotenuse length the longer it gets.



                                      Now, look at it another way.
                                      If you take the vertical length to 0 you will see that the hypotenuse reaches a new limit of?..... the adjacent side length. And now when the vertical length is 0 it is no longer a triangle it is just a line. As soon as the vertical length is anything greater than zero you will see that the hypotenuse becomes just greater than the adjacent length but it will never be less than or equal to the adjacent length or else you wont have a right triangle.



                                      Another limit of this triangle exist within the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent side. This angle can go from anything greater than 0 to anything less than 90 degrees. It will never be 0 or 90 degrees or else again the triangle breaks down and becomes a line. Even as that vertical line goes onto infinty the angle between the adjacent and hypotenuse will only approach 90 degrees but will never be 90 degrees.



                                      I hope this sheds some practical light on your mathmatical question.



                                      Cheers!






                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      This is a very good question and your diagram is helping me to understand a surveying problem im trying to solve, but anyhow i think i might be able to explain this a little bit, i hope haha.



                                      Without getting into the math it might help to look at the problem by understanding the absolute limits of the triangle you are describing ( a right triangle with a fixed horizantal length) by finding the absolute limits of a geometric shape you will see that all real points that are obtainable fit within the absolute limits. I hope this makes sense. Absolute limits are 0 and infinty both are un-attainable limits and everything must fit inside(or around in the case of zero) these limits. Make sense?



                                      So because of these two conditions you have created limits for the triangle. When we take the two variables ( vertical length and hypotenuse length) to their limits ( infinity) we see that they both become infinite or in other words when the vertical length goes to infinity the hypotenuse goes to infinity at the same time. This means that the vertical length is catching up to the hypotenuse length as the vertical gets longer ( hence not a linear ratio) until the vertical length reaches infinity and then it will equal the hypotenuse length of infinity. Otherwise the vertical length is always less than the hypotenuse because infinty is un attainable. This is why your graph stables out vertical length is catching up to hypotenuse length the longer it gets.



                                      Now, look at it another way.
                                      If you take the vertical length to 0 you will see that the hypotenuse reaches a new limit of?..... the adjacent side length. And now when the vertical length is 0 it is no longer a triangle it is just a line. As soon as the vertical length is anything greater than zero you will see that the hypotenuse becomes just greater than the adjacent length but it will never be less than or equal to the adjacent length or else you wont have a right triangle.



                                      Another limit of this triangle exist within the angle between the hypotenuse and the adjacent side. This angle can go from anything greater than 0 to anything less than 90 degrees. It will never be 0 or 90 degrees or else again the triangle breaks down and becomes a line. Even as that vertical line goes onto infinty the angle between the adjacent and hypotenuse will only approach 90 degrees but will never be 90 degrees.



                                      I hope this sheds some practical light on your mathmatical question.



                                      Cheers!







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered Sep 11 at 1:12









                                      David Linn

                                      11




                                      11



























                                           

                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded















































                                           


                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function ()
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1365746%2flength-of-hypotenuse-v-s-change-in-height-of-the-opposite%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                                          );

                                          Post as a guest













































































                                          這個網誌中的熱門文章

                                          How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                                          Mutual Information Always Non-negative

                                          Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?