Thread: Congruent Shapes

Hi, my friend helped me out with a problem before he had to go somewhere:



He told me that since it says '6 congruent shapes implies that the height is 2/3 of the width.' I never got that. After that though, it's basic linear equations, I ended up with 100 centimeters. But how did he come up with the height = 2/3 width thing?

Originally Posted by strood

Hi, my friend helped me out with a problem before he had to go somewhere:



He told me that since it says '6 congruent shapes implies that the height is 2/3 of the width.' I never got that. After that though, it's basic linear equations, I ended up with 100 centimeters. But how did he come up with the height = 2/3 width thing?

note that each smaller rectangle has a length 4 times its width ... so the height of the paver is 4W

bottom length of the paver (what you are calling the width) is 6 times the width = 6W

4W/6W = 2/3

Originally Posted by skeeter

note that each smaller rectangle has a length 4 times its width ... so the height of the paver is 4W

bottom length of the paver (what you are calling the width) is 6 times the width = 6W

4W/6W = 2/3

Hi, thanks for that, but how would you know if the rectangle's length is 4x its width? The shape may or may not be in scale... right?

Originally Posted by strood

Hi, thanks for that, but how would you know if the rectangle's length is 4x its width? The shape may or may not be in scale... right?

scale doesn't matter ... look at how the entire paver is constructed

Originally Posted by skeeter

scale doesn't matter ... look at how the entire paver is constructed

WOAH, nice! Did not catch that. Thanks!