Why Is the Small Angle Approximation Used in Optics Problems?

Click For Summary
The small angle approximation is commonly used in optics problems because it simplifies calculations by allowing the assumption that tan(x) ≈ x for small angles. This approximation is valid when angles are measured in radians, and it can be applied effectively even for angles larger than one might initially expect. To determine its applicability, one can evaluate the sine and tangent values for various small angles and observe their behavior. Understanding this approximation enhances problem-solving skills in physics, particularly in optics. Familiarity with the conditions under which the approximation holds is crucial for tackling similar problems in the future.
Gauss M.D.
Messages
151
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement



Had the same problem as this threadstarter:

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=109059

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I managed to find a ratio of tangents for the two angles. From there, it seems you're supposed to go "well tan(x) ≈ x for small angles so let's magically assume this is a small angle and go grab a donut".

Why is the small angle approximation appropriate for this problem and how do I avoid getting stuck on similar problems in the future?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You could try a range of small angles and judge for yourself, e.g.,

x=1°: x=... radians, sin x=..., tan x=...

x=2°: x=... radians, sin x=..., tan x=...

x=3°:


By working this out for yourself, you'll be left with a better appreciation of the result. :smile:

▣[/color] Remember, the trig approximations expect x to be in radians.
 
Do what nascent oxygen recommends...you will be surprised how 'BIG' the angle can be yet still be considered 'SMALL'
 
Of course the small angle approximation only works if you use radians.
 
Integral said:
Of course the small angle approximation only works if you use radians.

As recommended !
 
No, I get the small angle approximation, I just don't get how I am supposed to know that it is applicable here. I mean, we're not given any angles. We're supposed to figure it out through trig/geometry trickery.Theoretically, the angles could be pi/2 for all I know.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
8K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
908
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
9K
Replies
11
Views
19K
Replies
2
Views
4K