Volume of a cylinder and radius

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the radius of a cylinder, the volume must be converted into cubic inches if the desired radius is in inches. Using consistent units is crucial for accurate dimensional analysis. If the volume is initially in imperial fluid ounces, it should be converted to cubic inches to maintain unit compatibility. The cylinder's length should already be in inches for proper calculations. Consistent unit usage simplifies the process and avoids confusion.
John997766
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Ok so i know the equation for the volume of a cylinder and the equation for calculating the radius. But when calculating the radius does the volume need to be converted into cubic inches or can it stay as imperial fluid ounces.
Thanks
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
John997766 said:
Ok so i know the equation for the volume of a cylinder and the equation for calculating the radius. But when calculating the radius does the volume need to be converted into cubic inches or can it stay as imperial fluid ounces.
Thanks

It needs to be converted into cubic inches first if you want the radius in inches.
 
Use the volume units that are needed. Convert the length units to inch equivalents or convert the length units to their imperial fluid ounce unit.
Looking at what you described, you want a radius value, and you have the volume and cylinder length. Convert the volume into cubic inches! Now you have a formula for radius in inches. Your cylinder length should already be in inches.
 
John997766 said:
Ok so i know the equation for the volume of a cylinder and the equation for calculating the radius. But when calculating the radius does the volume need to be converted into cubic inches or can it stay as imperial fluid ounces.
Thanks
Sigh. See what happens when people do not use SI units! The dimensional analysis gets very complicated (and when people skip that part, the answer makes no sense).
 
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...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
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