Curvature of a circle approaches zero as radius goes to infinity

AI Thread Summary
As the radius of a circle approaches infinity, its curvature approaches zero, which can be mathematically expressed as lim (r → ∞) (1/r) = 0. The curvature of a circle is defined as the reciprocal of its radius, leading to the intuitive understanding that larger circles have less curvature. However, the concept of dividing infinity by infinity is indeterminate, complicating the discussion of values like pi in this context. The conversation also touches on the real projective line as a theoretical representation of such circles. Overall, the mathematical expression captures the relationship between increasing radius and decreasing curvature effectively.
BOAS
Messages
546
Reaction score
19
Hello,

this isn't a homework problem, so I'm hoping it's okay to post here.

I would like to know the correct way to mathematically express the idea in my title. It is intuitively obvious that as the radius of a circle increases, it's curvature decreases.

I looked it up and found that the curvature of a circle is equal to the reciprocal of it's radius. Certain assumptions are often made when looking at lenses, i.e the wave fronts reaching the lens are parallel, or have 0 curvature - In other words, the object distance is infinitely far away.

But, 1/∞ ≠ 0

So how do I express it properly?

In words, I think it goes something like this - As the radius tends towards infinity, the curvature of the circle tends towards zero.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Wouldn't you just use the lim 1/r expressions with r-> infinity to express it?
 
jedishrfu said:
Wouldn't you just use the lim 1/r expressions with r-> infinity to express it?

That would be my guess but I'm unsure of how to formulate that.

lim_{r \rightarrow ∞} \frac{1}{r} = 0

Like that?
 
If you imagine a circle with infinite radius, then its circumference is also infinite.
Then what would be the value of pi be? Infinite divided by infinite. Can you say what
it is?
I think the real projective line may be a picture of this kind of "circle":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_projective_line
 
7777777 said:
If you imagine a circle with infinite radius, then its circumference is also infinite.
Then what would be the value of pi be?
The same as always. ##\pi## is a constant (its value never changes).
7777777 said:
Infinite divided by infinite. Can you say what
it is?
No. There are several indeterminate forms, including [∞/∞], [0/0], [∞ - ∞], and a few others. These are indeterminate, because you can't determine a value for them.

They usually come up when we are evaluating limits of functions.
7777777 said:
I think the real projective line may be a picture of this kind of "circle":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_projective_line
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top