Thread 16839507

Radians are overrated. Why can't mathematicians use degrees which are much better?

Whenever degrees is used, people can instantly understand it. Take something like 40 degrees as an example. You instantly know that it is a little bit less than half of a right angle (or imagine subtracting 1/9 of a 45 degree angle).

Then take the same in radians: 0.69813170079773183... radians. How in the hell are you supposed to understand what that means? You don't. It's a mess of ugly random numbers instead of the beautiful 40 degrees.

>>16839507 (OP)
Pi=3
Pi/2=1.5
0.7 is slightly less than half of 1.5
(you) issue

>>16839507 (OP)
are you trolling?

>>16839507 (OP)
Everything should simply be measured on a scale from 0 and 1.

>>16839507 (OP)
Try taking a derivative of trig functions in degrees. Good luck. About as meaningful as using base-10 log instead of ln.

>>16839560
>Try taking a derivative of trig functions
Ok. d/dx [sin(x)] = cos(x)

>>16839566
Yeah, x has to be in radians. You'd get additional factors in front if you do it in degrees. Basic shit, anon.

>>16839579
>cos has to use radians
Wrong.

>>16839592
Did I say that? You can use whatever weird units you want, you’ll just have to deal with pointless trailing factors for no reason other than your retardation.
d/dx sin(x) = cos(x) in radians
d/dx sin(x) = pi/180 cos(x) in degrees
refresh your memory on hs calculus to see why this is the case

>>16839635
>You can use whatever weird units you want, you’ll just have to deal with pointless trailing factors
Clearly, you don't. See: >>16839566
>d/dx [sin(x)] = cos(x)
I don't see any mention of degrees or radians there. I just see 'x'. Have you ever considered the possibility that you're LITERALLY retarded and need to go back to /pol/ where you no doubt came here from?

>>16839646
You are legitimately retarded. Try doing an actual hands-on calculation using your idiotic claim that d/dx sin(x) = cos(x) in degrees before spewing embarrassing shit.

>>16839648
You realize d/dx sin(x) = cos(x) regardless of whether or not your x = y/180*pi, right? The terminal state of /sci/ - Science & Math...

>>16839507 (OP)
For me it's gradians

>>16839646
>I don't see any mention of degrees or radians there.
Another guy is right It's implicit that the angles would be radian. Because limit x-> 0 sin x/x = 1 because x is in rad- check your highschool textbook for this. Otherwise limit would be pi/180 which would be carried over in all trig derivatives.
>Have you ever considered the possibility that you're LITERALLY retarded and need to go back to /pol/ where you no doubt came here from?
Your "I'm always correct and anyone that disagrees with me is pol rightwing nazi" mentality won't do you any good son.
>>16839654
See above. In this day and age where you don't even have to Google to go to some website to dig answers and can directly use a bunch of llms for free, yet you choose to be ignorant fool.

>>16839507 (OP)
>Why can't mathematicians use degrees which are much better?

Because degrees are not mathematically founded. They are descended from a tradition used by the people of the fertile crescent, who liked the number 60 more than 10, it's the same reason there are 60 minutes in an hour and 60 seconds in a minute. Radians on the other hand are founded on the mathematical principles of using the length of an arc on a unit circle to measure angle. It's full mathematics without needing to use some weird unit like degrees.

>>16839710
>Another guy is right It's implicit that the angles would be radian
You're a fucking moron. The function has a period of 2pi. That's it. Nothing directly to do with muh radians. x is any real number. d/dx sin(x) = cos(x) knows or cares nothing about radians.

>>16839723
is d/dx sin(2x) = cos(2x)?

>>16839727
Is sin(2x) = sin(x)? I'm mind-blown by how dumb nu-/sci/ is...

>>16839732
Answer the question, retard kun. Is d/dx sin(2x) = cos(2x)?

>>16839734
See >>16839723. Read it over and over until you realize your error. You can't refute the post pointing out your error using some imaginary gotcha based directly on the repetition of this error. Closing this 80 IQ thread now.

>>16839560
> About as meaningful as using base-10 log instead of ln.

This nigga hasn't heard of decibels and the numerous physics, engineering and applied mathematics discuplines which primarily look at log-scaled quantities.

>>16839734
Anon, you're being retarded. If you use degrees, sin(x) is in degrees. That is, sin(90)=1 and sin(180)=0. Why does a simple variable switch confuse you so much?
d/dx sin(2x) is not cos(2x)
d/d(2x) sin(2x)=cos(2x)

>>16839554
are you a sage? Or holy man of some sort?

When I was a kid, I've seen old tables that had Radians, Degrees and some freaky measure of half circle divided into 100 parts.

Now I found it, it's called gradian. And it's 90 deg divided into 100 parts. I think it's the most convenient shit to go with, however popular angles of 60 and 30 degrees will become periodic numbers, sucks.

Disingenuous fags avoiding the question because they suddenly realized that a conversion factor like pi/180 pops out during differentiation. Shit thread. I’m out.

>>16839720
degrees are way more intuitive. FUCK radians and FUCK you if you use them

>>16839554
So one radian would be 0.159154943... whatever unit that is. 1/(2*pi) exactly. And 180 degrees would be 0.5, one degree would be 0.00277777....

i like how [eqn]\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} [-1]^n\frac{x^{2n}}{[2n]!}[/eqn] is in radians

>>16839803
If you squint you can see the r hiding inside the n.

>>16839507 (OP)
Why not just use both depending on what context you are in the same way you dont read books with an electron microscope when all you need are a pair of reading glasses?

I like my workshop messy with brushes and paint everywhere.

>>16839885
Let me guess, you’re an “enlightened” American who thinks using both imperial and metric measurements makes you somehow smarter than people who don’t torture themselves with such nonsense.

>>16839895
> Let me guess, you’re an “enlightened” American who thinks using both imperial and metric measurements makes you somehow smarter than people who don’t torture themselves with such nonsense.

I don't know if you know this, but basically every former member of the British empire has some level of mixed units. In Canada, as an example, most baking and cooking appliances still use imperial units. They'll use centigrade for the weather, and kilograms for mass/weight for people, and then when it comes time to cook it's "4 oz of vegetables with 1/4 cup of broth cooked at 375° F" just like in America.

The "right units" depends on the context and your purpose. If you're doing science or engineering work, SI/metric units are infinitely better for their easy order of magnitude interpretations. If you're just quickly getting a sense of the weather, having your habitable temperatures vary from 0 to 100 is pretty handy.

>>16839895
Truly enlightened person would invent his own measurement system. Like one guy here who proposed measure everything in dick.

>>16840150
Didn't read this wall of text. There are normal people who exclusive use metric and then there are anglos who argue as to whether weight is to be measured in pounds or stones.

>>16840466
It was 6 sentences you illiterate moron.

There's eight consecutive eights in the digits of 40 degrees in radians this early. It's like the Feynman point in pi but even more unlikely.