Angular Distance driven by a car going around a roundabout

  • Thread starter Thread starter aatari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angular Car
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of angular distance and displacement as it pertains to a car navigating a roundabout. Participants are examining calculations related to angular measurements and their interpretations.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the complexity of calculations and the representation of angular displacement. Questions arise about the validity of using different angular representations and the implications of negative values in displacement.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions and interpretations of angular displacement versus angular distance. Some participants provide feedback on calculations, while others express confusion regarding the relationship between given angles and displacement.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating assumptions about angular measurements, including the conventional ranges for angular displacement. There is a noted lack of consensus on how to interpret the displacement in relation to the given angle.

aatari
Messages
73
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
An inexperienced driver entered a roundabout, and could not figure out how to exit. The driver went around the roundabout 530 degrees before finding a way out. At any given time while in the roundabout, the driver was 6.30 m from the center of the roundabout. What was the distance covered while in the roundabout?
Relevant Equations
2πr
Can someone look at my solution to see if it is correct.
 

Attachments

  • WhatsApp Image 2020-10-23 at 6.58.53 PM.jpeg
    WhatsApp Image 2020-10-23 at 6.58.53 PM.jpeg
    46.4 KB · Views: 207
Physics news on Phys.org
Your calculation makes it look more complicated than it is, but yes, you got the right answer. Why did you not simply write a single equation:

(530/360)x2pix6.3 = 58.277
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aatari
phinds said:
Your calculation makes it look more complicated than it is, but yes, you got the right answer. Why did you not simply write a single equation:

(530/360)x2pix6.3 = 58.277
ah that makes sense. I always over complicate things. Thank you for your feedback.

Also, if I wanted to know the displacement of the inexperienced driver in the roundabout, would it simply be 530 - 2*360?
 
aatari said:
if I wanted to know the displacement of the inexperienced driver in the roundabout, would it simply be 530 - 2*360?
530-360 degrees would be the angular displacement about the centre of the roundabout. Why do you want to send it negative?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aatari
haruspex said:
530-360 degrees would be the angular displacement about the centre of the roundabout. Why do you want to send it negative?
what he said (very small).jpg
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: aatari
Thanks guys! very helpful.
 
haruspex said:
530-360 degrees would be the angular displacement about the centre of the roundabout. Why do you want to send it negative?
Why would someone think the displacement is equal to the given angle. It doesn't make any sense.
 
aatari said:
Why would someone think the displacement is equal to the given angle. It doesn't make any sense.
Are you suggesting that 530-360 (=170) degrees is NOT the angular displacement?
 
aatari said:
Why would someone think the displacement is equal to the given angle. It doesn't make any sense.
I'm not sure what your issue is.
We are dealing with angular displacement, not linear displacement. It is a bit different in that any given angle has an infinite number of representations. You could say the angular displacement is 530, or 530-360, or 530±360n; as angular displacements they are all the same, but as angular distances they are all different.
Generally one adopts a conventional range spanning 360 degrees, such as [0 , 360) or (-180 , 180], etc.
 
  • #10
phinds said:
Are you suggesting that 530-360 (=170) degrees is NOT the angular displacement?
well I think the displacement should be 530-360 = 170. But in a group chat some students are adamant that the displacement is simply the angle given - which in this case would be 530 degrees.
 
  • #11
haruspex said:
I'm not sure what your issue is.
We are dealing with angular displacement, not linear displacement. It is a bit different in that any given angle has an infinite number of representations. You could say the angular displacement is 530, or 530-360, or 530±360n; as angular displacements they are all the same, but as angular distances they are all different.
Generally one adopts a conventional range spanning 360 degrees, such as [0 , 360) or (-180 , 180], etc.
aha thank you for clarifying this. It makes sense.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
67
Views
5K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K