Is Δs Inaccurate for Large Values of Δθ and r in dθ = ds/r?

  • Thread starter Thread starter FieldvForce
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the accuracy of the formula dθ = ds/r for large values of Δθ and r. It is clarified that while the formula holds for arc length, it becomes inaccurate when Δs is interpreted as a displacement vector rather than an arc length. The complete formula for distance in polar coordinates is derived from the Pythagorean theorem, indicating that ds² = dr² + r² dθ² should be used for larger distances. The equation dθ = ds/r is only valid in the infinitesimal context when dr=0. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of using the correct formula based on the context of the variables involved.
FieldvForce
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
I know how this formula is made, but surely Δs becomes highly inaccurate for large values of Δθ and r?

In fact when Δθ is ∏ surely Δθ ≠ Δs/r.

Elucidation would very appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, if "s" is the arc length on a circle, and the angle is measured in radians, then the relations holds exactly for ALL values.
 
It holds even for θ = 2∏!
 
I know it holds for arc length but it's presenting that 's' as displacement, it's even linked linear velocity to this rule.

v = rω...how?

v = rω can't hold for 2∏ as displacement is 0...
 
FieldvForce said:
I know how this formula is made, but surely Δs becomes highly inaccurate for large values of Δθ and r?
That's why the correct formula uses "d" not "Δ".

FieldvForce said:
v = rω can't hold for 2∏ as displacement
This formula doesn't have displacement in it.
 
Last edited:
FieldvForce said:
I know it holds for arc length but it's presenting that 's' as displacement, it's even linked linear velocity to this rule.

v = rω...how?

Because \ v = lim_{t \rightarrow 0}\frac{ds}{dt} = lim_{t \rightarrow 0}r\frac{dθ}{dt}
 
FieldvForce said:
I know it holds for arc length but it's presenting that 's' as displacement, it's even linked linear velocity to this rule.

Even if ##s## is not the arc length, but the straight-line displacement between two points, ##ds=\frac{d\theta}{r}## is still exact because it's stated in terms of infinitesimals. If you do the line integral along the arc, you'll get ##\Delta{S}=\frac{\Delta{\theta}}{r}## where ##\Delta{S}## is the length along the arc.
 
A.T. said:
That's why the correct formula uses "d" not "Δ".


This formula doesn't have displacement in it.

I just used "d" because i didn't know how to use the symbol Δ in the title.

v = rω is concluded from avg(v)= r(avg)ω which is derived from using Δs/Δt = rΔθ/Δt

Yes to all posters talking about t approaching 0 and infinitesimals I agree it works there, but when t is large doesn't the equation become inaccurate?
 
Ah, I said when ds is very big and dθ when i should have said dt.
 
  • #10
FieldvForce said:
I know how this formula is made, but surely Δs becomes highly inaccurate for large values of Δθ and r?

In fact when Δθ is ∏ surely Δθ ≠ Δs/r.

Elucidation would very appreciated.
Well, the formula in the title is incomplete.

The exact formula for distance in a plane is given by the Pathagorean theorem:
ds²=dx²+dy²

The exact transformation to polar coordinates is
x = r cos(θ)
y = r sin(θ)

Substituting the exact transformation into the exact distance you get exactly
ds² = dr² + r² dθ²

Which is the complete formula. Of course, if you want to calculate a large distance then you have to integrate.

In the special case that dr=0 then you get your formula
dθ = ds/r
 
  • #11
If Δs is a displacement vector (i.e., relative position vector) between two points on a circle, then the equation only applies infinitecimally. If Δs is the arc length between two points on the circle, then it works for all values of Δθ. Did you mean to imply that Δs is supposed to be a relative position vector?
 
  • #12
FieldvForce, if Chestermiller is correct then you should be aware that a position vector is a path where dr≠0, so you cannot use your incomplete formula. You would need to use the full formula instead. In that sense, it would be inaccurate since you are using a simplified formula in a circumstance which violates the assumption on which the simplification is based.
 
  • #13
DaleSpam said:
Well, the formula in the title is incomplete.

The exact formula for distance in a plane is given by the Pathagorean theorem:
ds²=dx²+dy²

The exact transformation to polar coordinates is
x = r cos(θ)
y = r sin(θ)

Substituting the exact transformation into the exact distance you get exactly
ds² = dr² + r² dθ²

Which is the complete formula. Of course, if you want to calculate a large distance then you have to integrate.

In the special case that dr=0 then you get your formula
dθ = ds/r

Chestermiller said:
If Δs is a displacement vector (i.e., relative position vector) between two points on a circle, then the equation only applies infinitecimally. If Δs is the arc length between two points on the circle, then it works for all values of Δθ. Did you mean to imply that Δs is supposed to be a relative position vector?

DaleSpam said:
FieldvForce, if Chestermiller is correct then you should be aware that a position vector is a path where dr≠0, so you cannot use your incomplete formula. You would need to use the full formula instead. In that sense, it would be inaccurate since you are using a simplified formula in a circumstance which violates the assumption on which the simplification is based.

Thank you very much for clearing things up.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
12K
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K