Uniqueness/ Non-uniquenss of Cartesian & Polar Coordinates

AI Thread Summary
Cartesian coordinates provide a unique representation for each point in a two-dimensional plane, defined by its distance from the x-axis and y-axis as (x,y). In contrast, polar coordinates can represent the same point in multiple ways, such as (r,θ), allowing for non-uniqueness due to varying angles while maintaining the same distance from the origin. For example, the point (1,0) in Cartesian coordinates can correspond to multiple polar representations like (1,0), (1,2π), and (1,4π). This non-uniqueness is particularly useful for representing circular or symmetric patterns where angles are more relevant. Ultimately, both coordinate systems have distinct advantages and applications based on the problem at hand.
Apophis
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
What is the difference in the "uniqueness" of the representations of Cartesian coordinates and in polar coordinates? :confused: Also, what is the non-uniqueness?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take an example:

The point with unique cartesian coordinates (1,0) has many possible polar coordinates, such as (1,0), (1, 2\pi), (1,4\pi).

Non-uniqueness is having multiple expressions for the same point.
 


Cartesian coordinates and polar coordinates are two different systems used to represent points in a two-dimensional plane. The main difference between the two is the way in which they describe the location of a point.

In Cartesian coordinates, a point is represented by its distance from two perpendicular lines, known as the x-axis and y-axis, and is denoted by (x,y). This system is also known as the rectangular coordinate system. On the other hand, polar coordinates represent a point by its distance from the origin and its angle from a fixed reference line, known as the polar axis. A point in polar coordinates is denoted by (r,θ).

One of the main differences in the uniqueness of the representations of Cartesian and polar coordinates lies in the way they describe a point. In Cartesian coordinates, a point can be uniquely identified by its x and y coordinates, whereas in polar coordinates, a point can be represented in multiple ways. For example, a point with coordinates (1, π/4) can also be represented as (1, 5π/4) or (-1, 3π/4) in polar coordinates.

This concept of multiple representations of a point is known as non-uniqueness. It means that a single point can have different representations in polar coordinates, depending on the choice of the polar axis and the reference angle. This is because the distance from the origin remains the same, but the angle can be measured in different ways.

In contrast, Cartesian coordinates have a unique representation for each point, making it easier to locate and identify a point on a plane. However, polar coordinates have advantages in certain situations, such as representing circular or symmetric patterns, where the distance from the origin and the angle are more relevant than the x and y coordinates.

In conclusion, the uniqueness of Cartesian and polar coordinates lies in the way they describe a point, with Cartesian coordinates having a unique representation for each point, while polar coordinates have non-uniqueness due to the multiple ways in which a point can be represented. Both systems have their advantages and are used in different applications depending on the nature of the problem.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top