Solveeit Logo

Question

Question: In what ratio are the joining points \((3, - 6)\) and \(( - 6,8)\) divided by the \(y\)- axis?...

In what ratio are the joining points (3,6)(3, - 6) and (6,8)( - 6,8) divided by the yy- axis?

Explanation

Solution

In this question we will use the section formula to solve this question. We know that if point(x,y)(x,y) divides the line joining the points (x1,y1)({x_1},{y_1}) and (x2,y2)({x_2},{y_2}) in the ratio m:nm:n, then we can say that the point of division of the coordinates are (x,y)=(mx2+nx1m+n,my2+ny1m+n)(x,y) = \left( {\dfrac{{m{x_2} + n{x_1}}}{{m + n}},\dfrac{{m{y_2} + n{y_1}}}{{m + n}}} \right). Using this we can solve the given question.

Complete step by step answer:
First let us assume the ratio that the yy - axis that divides the lines joining the points (3,6)(3, - 6) and (6,8)( - 6,8) be k:1k:1 and the point of intersection of this line to the y- axis to be (0,y)(0,y).
We will now use the section formula i.e. (x,y)=(mx2+nx1m+n,my2+ny1m+n)(x,y) = \left( {\dfrac{{m{x_2} + n{x_1}}}{{m + n}},\dfrac{{m{y_2} + n{y_1}}}{{m + n}}} \right).
With comparing from the question we have
x1=3,y1=6,m=k,n=1{x_1} = 3,{y_1} = - 6,m = k,n = 1 and x2=6,y2=8{x_2} = - 6,{y_2} = 8.
We know that the xx coordinate of the point of division is 00. So using this we can write: 0=6×k+3×1k+10 = \dfrac{{ - 6 \times k + 3 \times 1}}{{k + 1}}.
On solving we have
0=6k+3k+10=6k+30 = \dfrac{{ - 6k + 3}}{{k + 1}} \Rightarrow 0 = - 6k + 3.
By transferring the constant term to the R.H.S , we have
6k=3- 6k = - 3.
Now we will isolate the term kk , it gives:
k=36k=12\therefore k = \dfrac{{ - 3}}{{ - 6}} \Rightarrow k = \dfrac{1}{2}.
We can write this also as k=1:2k = 1:2 .

Hence yy - axis divide it in the ratio 1:21:2.

Note: In this type of question, we have to remember the concept of section formula. We should note that if we get the negative value of kk , in the above solution then it suggests that the point dividing it in k:1k:1 will not lie in between the line segments and it will divide the line externally, not internally.