Talk:Unit circle
 | This  level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Untitled comment
editThis was a duplicate page, at "Unit Circle":
The Unit Circle is a circle of radius 1 unit, oftenly used to define the functions of trigonometry.
In this diagram, individual points on the unit circle are labeled first with its coordinates (exact values), with the angle in degree angular measure, then with radian angular measure. Points in the lower hemisphere have both positive and negative angles marked.
Geometers notation S2: really? I don't think I have ever seen this - which is not to say it isn't used, but is it common enough to warrant inclusion?
Charles Matthews 12:30, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
In the representation of the triginometric functions in the unit circle, it would be useful to add that the values of the tangent of an angle theta are also represented by the vertical tangent to the unit circle and the values of the co-tangent by the horizontal tangent.
why doesn't anyone like math?
editi really like what we're doing in calculus, but everybody hates math...why is that?
- There are many people who like math. However, this isn't the right place for this question - try Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics instead (in fact, I think it was asked there some time ago, maybe you should try looking in the archives for some useful responses). -- Meni Rosenfeld (talk) 20:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
i don't like math because the concepts are confusing. i don't enjoy math because if you don't understand one small detail, then your entire answer is off, or you don't know where to begin in solving the problem itself. math leads to frustration in my experience. it has always been my worst subject. this year i am taking a trig class (because it's a requirement and because it looks good on your resume). we are learning about the unit circle. the π/6, π/3, etc etc confuses me so much. when i ask for help of course whoever is helping me asks what part do you not understand. THE WHOLE DARN THING! just do the problem for me so i can figure out the next one! so with that said, if anyone would be so kind as to explain the unit circle to me in words i would understand (just pretend you're explaining it to a 10 year old, which i'm not, but chances are i wil understand what you are saying, mathematically). thank you so much. i hope this ramble also answered the above question, "why doesn't anyone like math?" i wish i did. life would be a lot easier. i'm just more of a languages personWiki234234 (talk) 22:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)RNR
Image at bottom of page
editWhat is the image at the bottom of the page for? I don't think a discussion of a circle of radius 1 versus a circle of diameter 1 has any place on this page.
- yes it does. it completely relates to the unit circle. Wiki234234 (talk) 22:17, 20 September 2009 (UTC)RNR
Matulga 21:11, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
- yes sir, it does. --Successfultrollissuccessful (talk) 22:47, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Circle-trig6.svg
editThe image Circle-trig6.svg doesn't even come close to printing out correctly for me.
Euclidean plane
edit'Euclidean plane' is (deliberately?) unclickable. Are we, here, at the boundary between elicitation of responses to multiple-choice questions and professing of purported facts? Knotwork (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
Please include reference to Euler's formula
edithttp://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Euler's_formula
This article needs to be a reference. It is deeply related to how and why the unit circle works. The first section "Forms of unit circle points" even gives the formula without linking to it or explaining what it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.213.106 (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Clarity
editThis article is another truly terrible maths article within Wikipedia. Maths -isn't- hard if it is explained properly. The information in this article may be technically correct but if the knowledge cannot be conveyed clearly and simply to the audience then it is failing the encyclopedia. Encyclopedias are not pure reference books, they are conveyors of information. The choice of language used and the pacing of the concepts could use some untangling. This is of course a problem with many of the maths related articles in Wikipedia, but it becomes frustrating when consistently each article viewed has the same language/style problems. One simply ends up going elsewhere to find out what a unit circle is for and how it works.
88.105.200.79 (talk) 03:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)Sam, UK
Animation of the unit circle
editThanks @Boothsift: for fixing the typo, the animation of thumbnails of large resolution GIFs is broken See: [1] and possibly other bugs. BFG (talk) 03:48, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
- @BFG: Thank you! Happy New Years! --It's Boothsift 07:38, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Distinguishing between Unit Circles of e^jt, cos(t) and sin(t)
editHi, I'd like to help people like me and myself in the future, who fall in this trap and confuse between UC in the complex plane, UC of sinus and UC of cosinus. I want to add a pic of 3 circles instead of the main image that will illustrate the differences. And plus I think there is a room to add the delay gap graph between sinus and cosinus. Vitalipom (talk) 11:21, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
- Below is the response copied from my talk page:--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 17:54, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
Hi, you removed the Unit Circle sammary image I've added. Many people fail exams because of lack of such sammary on Google searches. It's a very common topic in many school tests and academic courses.
I saw you commented there is no link to resource. So first of all, I added a discussion prior to making the changes. Why undo someone's work and not leaving a comment asking for proper sources if that's the problem?
Secondly, you want me to add the sources in order to undo the undo?
Best regards,
Vitalipom
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitalipom (talk • contribs) 12:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Vitalipom: The protocol on Wikipedia talk pages is to add new material to the bottom of the page (this is not common in the rest of the web). I have taken the liberty of moving your comment here, I hope you don't mind.
- While you did initiate a discussion of this on the appropriate talk page, the lack of responses should have told you something. Your serious confusion of basic concepts made it hard for editors to react in a meaningful way. One could distinguish between unit circles in the Euclidean plane and the complex plane, but the definition remains the same in either setting. The three functions you mention do not define different unit circles, they are only used to express the coordinates of the points on the unit circle in different ways. If you actually found sources for your point of view, you should probably throw them away as being useless.--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- The image I added might help people learn for their exams more efficiently. Where can add to be findable and in appropriate context? Vitalipom (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- @Bill Cherowitzo: not sure if I know how to tag Vitalipom (talk) 18:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough. The images you posted are wrong! You have given cartesian coordinates of some points on various curves, but in no case do these points lie on a circle (unit or otherwise). At the very least, these diagrams are misleading and would do considerable harm to anyone using them to study for an exam. If your intent was to use them as a mnemonic device, they seem to me to be too cluttered to serve that purpose.--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 19:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
- Bill Cherowitzo oh I see, you're saying that sin(2pi) has nothing to do with the Unit Circle, well then you're not right. sinus(teta) is the relation in the triangle which's angle teta and hypothenuse is 1 (one unit). Now look what you did. You reverted my work, deleted twice something that someone else did. You are not aware of this material and apparently you need these schemes more than the students to whom I uploaded it because you publicly call yourself Mathematician on Wiki pages. And finally you prevented thousands of pupil not less smarter than you to prepare for the exam. —Preceding undated comment added 08:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Actually I am preventing thousands of students from getting false information that will not help them on any exams.--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 18:28, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Bill Cherowitzo oh I see, you're saying that sin(2pi) has nothing to do with the Unit Circle, well then you're not right. sinus(teta) is the relation in the triangle which's angle teta and hypothenuse is 1 (one unit). Now look what you did. You reverted my work, deleted twice something that someone else did. You are not aware of this material and apparently you need these schemes more than the students to whom I uploaded it because you publicly call yourself Mathematician on Wiki pages. And finally you prevented thousands of pupil not less smarter than you to prepare for the exam. —Preceding undated comment added 08:54, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Perhaps I did not make myself clear enough. The images you posted are wrong! You have given cartesian coordinates of some points on various curves, but in no case do these points lie on a circle (unit or otherwise). At the very least, these diagrams are misleading and would do considerable harm to anyone using them to study for an exam. If your intent was to use them as a mnemonic device, they seem to me to be too cluttered to serve that purpose.--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 19:23, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
- While you did initiate a discussion of this on the appropriate talk page, the lack of responses should have told you something. Your serious confusion of basic concepts made it hard for editors to react in a meaningful way. One could distinguish between unit circles in the Euclidean plane and the complex plane, but the definition remains the same in either setting. The three functions you mention do not define different unit circles, they are only used to express the coordinates of the points on the unit circle in different ways. If you actually found sources for your point of view, you should probably throw them away as being useless.--Bill Cherowitzo (talk) 18:26, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
- I can't see that the new image is better than the one that was there. It's lower quality, uses confusing notation, some of which is just plain wrong. The lead image should simply have one unit circle with some appropriate decorations, not 4 with incorrect use of ordered pairs. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:24, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- What Deacon Vorbis said. The new image is much worse than the old, and it makes a simple thing needlessly complicated. XOR'easter (talk) 20:37, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
I’m outa of here. Vitalipom (talk) 15:00, 9 June 2020 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
editThe following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:38, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
