Definition of distance -AR type problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jahnavi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition Type
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the definition of distance in the context of a reasoning question that includes statements about distance and displacement. Participants are attempting to clarify the distinctions between scalar and vector quantities and how they relate to the definitions provided in the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the correctness of various statements regarding distance and displacement, questioning whether certain statements provide valid explanations for others. There is a focus on the definitions of distance and the implications of these definitions on the nature of the quantities involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the definitions of distance and path length, while others express confusion about the context of the question. There is an ongoing examination of whether the statements provided are accurate and how they relate to the definitions of scalar and vector quantities.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the absence of a clear definition of "length of path traversed," which has led to differing interpretations of the statements in the problem. The discussion also highlights the potential ambiguity in the term "distance" as it may refer to different concepts depending on context.

Jahnavi
Messages
848
Reaction score
102

Homework Statement


assertion.png

Aquestion.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



These assertion reasoning questions are little tricky . Even simple questions get wrong in a time bound objective test .

In this question I think it should be option b) i.e Both the statements are correct but Statement R is not the correct explanation of statement A . But this is marked wrong .

Statement R doesn't explain that a scalar quantity has only magnitude but no direction .Displacement is also length of the path along with the direction.

What option would other members choose ?
 

Attachments

  • assertion.png
    assertion.png
    49.3 KB · Views: 1,023
  • Aquestion.png
    Aquestion.png
    3.9 KB · Views: 712
Physics news on Phys.org
Dispacement is the vector not distance.It should be (c)
 
palkia said:
Dispacement is the vector not distance.It should be (c)

No . c) is clearly wrong .

Please read the question carefully . R is correct statement .

@haruspex , what would you choose ?

I guess it's a toss up between a) and b) .
 
palkia said:
Dispacement is the vector not distance.It should be (c)
That is in itself an example of (d).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Orodruin
Jahnavi said:
No . c) is clearly wrong .

Please read the question carefully . R is correct statement .

@haruspex , what would you choose ?

I guess it's a toss up between a) and b) .
The difficulty is that we are not provided a definition of length of path traversed. Here it is: If ##\vec {ds}## is the general vector element of a path P then length traversed is ##\int_P|\vec {ds}|##
This is clearly a scalar, so (a).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jahnavi
Looks like I misread the question...my mistake.

I think it should be (A) then
 
haruspex said:
The difficulty is that we are not provided a definition of length of path traversed. Here it is: If ##\vec {ds}## is the general vector element of a path P then length traversed is ##\int_P|\vec {ds}|##
This is clearly a scalar, so (a).

OK . I agree R is a correct statement :smile:

But the point is whether R is a correct reasoning for statement A .Does R correctly explain statement A ?
 
Jahnavi said:
OK . I agree R is a correct statement :smile:

But the point is whether R is a correct reasoning for statement A .Does R correctly explain statement A ?
In post #5 I provided the (missing) definition of length of path traversed. That definition clearly makes length of path traversed a scalar. The R statement claims that distance is length of path traversed, and you accept that as true. Does it not follow that distance is a scalar?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jahnavi
haruspex said:
Does it not follow that distance is a scalar?

OK .

Is it okay if I combine the two statements and read them together like this =>

Since/Because distance is the length of path traversed , it is a scalar quantity .

OR

Distance is a scalar quantity because it is the length of path traversed .

Is that correct ?
 
  • #10
Jahnavi said:
OK .

Is it okay if I combine the two statements and read them together like this =>

Since/Because distance is the length of path traversed , it is a scalar quantity .

OR

Distance is a scalar quantity because it is the length of path traversed .

Is that correct ?
Yes, both forms are correct.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jahnavi
  • #11
Thanks :smile:
 
  • #12
haruspex said:
The difficulty is that we are not provided a definition of length of path traversed. Here it is: If ##\vec {ds}## is the general vector element of a path P then length traversed is ##\int_P|\vec {ds}|##
This is clearly a scalar, so (a).
I disagree. The distance between two points is a scalar so the assertion is true. However, the distance between two points is independent of the path - it is the length of the shortest path - which makes the stated reason a false statement unless you specify that the path must be a straight line.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jahnavi and Tom.G
  • #13
Orodruin said:
I disagree. The distance between two points is a scalar so the assertion is true. However, the distance between two points is independent of the path - it is the length of the shortest path - which makes the stated reason a false statement unless you specify that the path must be a straight line.
Yes and no.
The question takes "distance" out of context. It is not clear whether we are discussing distance between two points or distance traveled. Since it mentions a path traversed, I feel it is reasonable to assume that context.
So to be precise, distance can mean the length of path traversed, and when it does mean that it follows that it is a scalar.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jahnavi

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K