Small Angle Question in relation to Astronomy

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the application of the small angle formula in astronomy, specifically regarding a binary star system 400 light-years away with a separation of 36 arcseconds. The initial confusion arises from using the formula with an angle measured in degrees rather than radians, leading to an incorrect physical separation calculation of 4 light-years. The correct approach involves converting the angle from degrees to radians, resulting in a proper calculation that aligns with expected values. The small angle formula, which approximates theta as sin(theta) and tan(theta), only holds true when theta is expressed in radians. Ultimately, understanding this distinction resolves the initial misunderstanding.
astropi
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
First of all this is NOT for class! Secondly, this seems rather simple, so perhaps I am simply overlooking the obvious. Anyway, here goes:

If some binary star is about 400 ly away, and a telescope gives a separation of 36" (0.01 degrees) for the binary, then can we use the small angle formula? Well, it certainly seems like we should be able to. However, the small angle formula for tangent is is just [ tex ]tan\theta \sim \theta[ /tex ]. If we then calculate the physical separation between the two stars we get 4 ly, which is incorrect. If instead of taking the small angle formula we just take the tangent of 0.01 we get 0.00017 and that in turn leads to the "correct" distance. My question becomes why does the small angle formula fail here? What am I missing? Thanks!

edit: sorry, I can not get the latex to work for some reason!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The small angle formula, i.e. theta ~= sin(theta) ~= tan(theta), only works when theta is measured in radians, not when theta is measured in degrees. If you convert 0.01 degrees into radians, theta(radians) = 0.01 * pi/180 = .00017. Then everything works.
 
phyzguy said:
The small angle formula, i.e. theta ~= sin(theta) ~= tan(theta), only works when theta is measured in radians, not when theta is measured in degrees. If you convert 0.01 degrees into radians, theta(radians) = 0.01 * pi/180 = .00017. Then everything works.

Yes, you're absolutely right. And, believe it or not, I realized that as soon as I posted (duh)!
Thanks for the reply though :)
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top