Length of curve in Polar coordinate system

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the length of a curve in the polar coordinate system, the correct formula involves integrating the expression s = ∫√((dr/dθ)² + r²)dθ, rather than simply ∫r(a)da. This formula accounts for both the change in radial position (dr) and the arc length due to the angular change (rdθ). The Pythagorean theorem is applied to derive the proper infinitesimal length segment (ds). In the specific case of a circle, where r is constant, the formula simplifies to s = ∫rdθ. Understanding these components is essential for accurate calculations in polar coordinates.
ltd5241
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
I want to caculate length of curve in Polar coordinate system like this: if r=r(a)
then length of the curve is ∫r(a)da Is this right? if not ,why ?
What's the right one ?
I konw the way in rectangular coordinate system,I just want to do it in Polar coordinate system .
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You can think of it like an infinitesimal form of the Euclidean distance formula. For a function f(t)=\langle x_1(t),x_2(t),x_3(t),\ldots\rangle

\sum_a^b \sqrt { \Delta x_1^2 + \Delta x_2^2+\Delta x_3^2+\ldots } \longrightarrow s=\int_{a}^{b} \sqrt { dx_1^2 + dx_2^2+dx_3^2+\ldots} = \int_{a}^{b} \sqrt { \left(\frac{dx_1}{dt}\right)^2 + \left(\frac{dx_2}{dt}\right)^2+\left(\frac{dx_3}{dt}\right)^2+\ldots}\text{ } dt
 
Is this ∫r(a)da wrong? Why?
 
You need to know what the appropriate infinitesemal length segments are!

Now, if you do polar coordinates, you may decompose a stretch of a curve into two parts:
1. The change in the radial position from the initial point on the curve to the final point.
Infinitesemally, this has length dr.

2. Here's the tricky part: The tiny arc by which the curve segment can be approximated by a circular arc, supported by a tiny angular change between the first point and the final point on the curve.
Clearly, that circular arc lies AT a radius of the value "r", and setting the angular change as d\theta[/tex], we get the expression rd\theta[/tex] for that length segment.<br /> <br /> 3. Now, we apply the Pythogorean theorem to these two length segment to gain the proper curve segment ds:<br /> ds=\sqrt{(dr)^{2}+(rd\theta)^{2}}<br /> <br /> 4. Assuming that the radial position of the point of the curve is describable as a function of the angular variable, we may rewrite this as:<br /> ds=\sqrt{(\frac{dr}{d\theta})^{2}+r^{2}}d\theta<br /> <br /> 5. This is then the proper infinitesemal form of the lengthn segment, and the length s of the curve can then be calculated as:<br /> s=\int_{\theta_{0}}^{\theta_{1}}\sqrt{(\frac{dr}{d\theta})^{2}+r^{2}}d\theta<br /> <br /> 6. Note that in the case of a CIRCLE, where r is a constant function of the angle, this reduces to:<br /> s=\int_{\theta_{0}}^{\theta_{1}}rd\theta<br /> as it should do.
 
Thank you ! Especially you,Arildno.
 
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...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
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