Deriving the Formula for S = theta * radius

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the formula S = theta * radius, which defines the relationship between the arc length (S), the angle in radians (theta), and the radius of a circle. Participants are exploring the origins and implications of this formula, particularly in the context of defining radians.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the derivation and proof of the formula, with some suggesting that it is a definition rather than something that can be proven mathematically. Others are attempting to relate the formula to the circumference of a circle and the concept of radians.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have provided links for further reading, while others emphasize the definitional nature of radians and the impossibility of a mathematical proof for the formula.

Contextual Notes

There is a notable emphasis on the definitions of units of measure, particularly the radian, and how these definitions impact the understanding of the formula. Participants are grappling with the distinction between definition and proof in mathematical contexts.

Miike012
Messages
1,009
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


S = theta * radius

I don't understand how they came up with this formula... can some one show me the proof how they derived this formula or can someone send me a link and I will just read it. Thank you.


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, this formula is the DEFINITION of the unit 'radians'. The theta that you mentioned in this formula is measured in radians.

The measurement of an angle in 'radians' is defined as the length of the arc that it subtends divided by the radius.
 
Just by definition, plug in theta with respect to it's radians and compare it to the cirumference formula (there is a a lot of similiarty)
C = 2\pi r
Now if you use the formula
S_{arc} = \theta_{rad} r
and plug in a degree \theta_{rad} with respect to radians you end up with some result
N\pi r
where N is a rational number.
 
Ok... but what is the mathamatical proof.
 
Miike012 said:
Ok... but what is the mathamatical proof.

There is no mathematical proof! That's how the quantities have been defined!
 
Perhaps what is really wanted is a proof that arc length is proportional to the product of the angle and the radius.
 
Redbelly98 said:
Perhaps what is really wanted is a proof that arc length is proportional to the product of the angle and the radius.

That would be nice..
 
  • #10
Miike012 said:
Ok... but what is the mathamatical proof.

You can't have a mathematical proof for such a question. It's all part of the definition of the radian. One radian is the angle necessary within a circle of radius 1 to produce an arc that is also equal to 1, more formally 1rad = 180/pi. Further, radians are measured in terms of the length of the arc divided by the radius of the arc.

To ask for a mathematical "proof" is like proving that 1+1=2 instead of =zero. Why is it that that little + symbol doesn't decrease 1 from 1? You simply can't prove it, because humans have defined the symbols +, -, etc. at our discretion. We have likewise defined the definition of units of measure such as the radian. With other systems of measure, you can't prove that there are 24 hours in a day mathematically. Us humans have simply chosen to divide the day into 24 sections, and we gave these sections the name "hour."
 
  • #12
thanks for all your help everyone
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K