Seeming paradox when squaring distance depending on units

  • Thread starter Thread starter CuriousBanker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Paradox Units
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion arising from squaring distances and converting units. The initial calculation incorrectly equates 528 feet squared to 278,784 feet instead of recognizing it as 278,784 square feet. The correct conversion between square feet and square miles must account for the different scaling factors, specifically that 1 mile squared equals 27,878,400 square feet. When using the proper conversion factor, 528 feet squared correctly translates to 0.01 miles squared. This highlights the importance of using accurate unit conversions in mathematical calculations.
CuriousBanker
Messages
190
Reaction score
24
Hello all

This is probably simple and I'm overlooking something

1 mile = 5280 feet

10% of a mile is 528 feet

528 feet squared is 278,784 feet which is 52.8 miles squared

But 0.1 miles squared is .01 miles squared

So depending on if you square it as 0.1 miles, or if you convert it to feet, then square it and convert it back, you get wildly different answers

Why is this.? Not sure why I thought of this.

Thanks in advance
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
528 feet squared is 278,784 feet which is 52.8 miles squared
You used the wrong conversion factor.

First of all, (528 feet)2 is not equal to 278784 feet. It is equal to 278784 feet2.

In any case, you want to convert this to a value in miles2.

Now, the conversion factor between feet2 and miles2 is not the same as the conversion factor between feet and miles, because feet2 are not the same as feet, and miles2 are not the same as miles. In fact, the conversion factor is 27878400 feet2 = 1 mile2, and if you use this correct conversion factor you will get the correct answer of 0.01 miles2.
 
CuriousBanker said:
528 feet squared is 278,784 feet

That should be feet squared.

##\frac{278784 ft^2}{1} \cdot \frac{(1 mi)^2}{(5280ft)^2} = 0.01 mi^2##
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top