How would you calculate the area if you had to paint a rectangular wall that had a rectangular window?this worksheet was given for St. Patrick's Day. I dont know how to approach the question to find the answer. Do i subtract the numbers on the right from the numbers on the left? Do i use the surface area formula?
thanks
flo
regular area? I would multiply the length and widthHow would you calculate the area if you had to paint a rectangular wall that had a rectangular window?
How would you find the area that needs to be painted, given the dimensions of the wall and the window?regular area? I would multiply the length and width
Multiply the wall measurements, add them, then subtract the window/door measurements?How would you find the area that needs to be painted, given the dimensions of the wall and the window?
I think that is how it should be done, but the dimensions on the right should be subtracted from 180, hence giving 134 (?)Was there additional information provided? The question seems mysterious.
The most straightforward interpretation is that six walls, none with windows or doors, needed to be painted.
If that is correct, the answer is 180 sq ft.
Since my example has only one wall and one window, there is nothing to add. Yes, this is the right approach - calculate the total area of the surface (all walls) and subtract the total area of the "holes" (doors and windows).Multiply the wall measurements, add them, then subtract the window/door measurements?
Quite frankly, I do not know. It talks about six walls needing paint. And it talks about walls without windows or doors not needing paint. Are there 11 walls. Very badly worded problem.I think that is how it should be done, but the dimensions on the right should be subtracted from 180, hence giving 134 (?)
No, only 6 walls. It's the 5 doors and windows that don't need painting.Quite frankly, I do not know. It talks about six walls needing paint. And it talks about walls without windows or doors not needing paint. Are there 11 walls. Very badly worded problem.
Programmers too.Mathematicians, better than almost any other type of academic, know the importance of exact description.
Relative pronouns like "that" refer to the immediately preceding noun. Admittedly, when people are speaking, this rule is frequently ignored, but any resulting ambiguity can be cleared up with questions. In writing, however, a dialogue with the author is not possible. This means that ambiguity must be avoided from the start, and doing so often requires great care with the use of relative pronouns in lengthy sentences.So it should be "windows and doors in the walls" that didnt need painting, not "windows and doors" in the walls that didnt need painting.
i believe that it should be interpreted that the "windows and doors in the walls" dont need painting, not "windows and doors" in the walls that dont need to be painted.
they definetely should have been more precise
Indeed.Programmers too.