Radius x Height: Unpacking the Mystery of Volume in Cubes

AI Thread Summary
The volume of a cone is calculated using the formula 1/3 pi R^2 h, which results in cubic units because height adds a third dimension. Multiplying different dimensions, such as radius and height, is valid and contributes to the overall volume, as shown in the equation X^2 * Z = X^3. Each variable represents a length, and when combined, they yield a volume measurement in cubic units. The discussion emphasizes the importance of recognizing units in mathematical operations to ensure correct dimensional analysis. Ultimately, multiplying three lengths always results in volume, confirming the consistency of dimensionality in geometry.
squarkman
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hi,
The volume of a cone is 1/3 pi R^2 h.
Why then is the answer in units cubed. Certainly the h is contributing a third dimension but in general math you don't see this happening
X^2 * Z = X^3
but the below is true
X^2 * X = X^3

Can a radius be multiplied by a height to make the dimension increase?
What's going on here?
Thx
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Of course you can multiply by a height to make the dimension increase. X^2 * X = X^3 means you are multiplying the same variable. You can replace with Z and your new value is not X^3, but ZX^2 which has units of length cubed. Think of a rectangle with width X, length Y, and height Z. Surely you multiply them all together and you get length-cubed dimensions. X, Y, and Z all represent different lengths, but they represent length none-the-less.
 
In fact, this can be used for error checking. If you arrived at an answer that should be volume and you end up with units of length squared, you know you did something wrong.
 
squarkman said:
Hi,
The volume of a cone is 1/3 pi R^2 h.
Why then is the answer in units cubed. Certainly the h is contributing a third dimension but in general math you don't see this happening
X^2 * Z = X^3
but the below is true
X^2 * X = X^3

Can a radius be multiplied by a height to make the dimension increase?
What's going on here?
Thx
You are not distinguishing between numbers and their units. (X m)2(Z m)= (X2Z) m3, just as (X m)(Y m)(Z m)= (XYZ) m3.

If you multiply three length measurements together, the result is alway in volume units whether the lengths themselves are the same or not.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top