Talk:Turn (geometry)

Others than Hoyle

I cannot find any other references for this. While Hoyle may have proposed this, he also proposed lots of other things that aren't notable. -- Nike 17:38, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Tau symbol in the table

I find the usage of the unit tau a bit strange. While I like the "Tau = 2*Pi" idea, I think a turn sounds like "1 turn", and so should have the value "1", not "Tau". So imho, the table here as well as in the degrees, radians and grad articles should be:

Units	Values
Turns	0	1/12	1/10	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/2	3/4	1
Degrees	0°	30°	36°	45°	60°	72°	90°	180°	270°	360°
Radians	0	${\tfrac {1}{6}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{4}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{3}}\pi$	${\tfrac {2}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{2}}\pi$	$\pi \,$	${\tfrac {3}{2}}\pi$	$2\pi \,$
Grads	0g	33⅓g	40g	50g	66⅔g	80g	100g	200g	300g	400g

I mean, if you add the tau = 2pi symbol behind each value in the Turns row, the values are identical to those in the Radians row. And a wheel doing half a turn, is really doing 0.5 turns, not 0.5*2*pi = 3.1415 turns (which would be more than 3 full rotations!). One turn really is a single turn, it's just really incorrect to put a mathematical constant having the value of 2pi there.

Turns is the same as rotations, right? As in "rotations per minute"?

Is this stuff actually officially described anywhere?

Anyone agree?

--92.107.35.50 (talk) 13:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. If we want a row for τ/12, τ/10, etc, it should be labelled "Radians" (or perhaps "radians in terms of τ"). Or maybe there should be a Radians row which has entries like "π/6 = τ/12" "τ/12 (π/6)" or some such. In the tau manifesto, Hartl uses "π-radians" for "radians in terms of π", which I'm not sure I like (it certainly isn't self-explanatory). As for where this is described, I suspect we cite most of the sources (either directly or by following whatever Hartl cites). Shouldn't be especially complicated: you can use τ whereever you might use 2π. Kingdon (talk) 23:18, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree too. τ is simply the number of radians in one turn. "π-radians" doesn't mean anything and π radians is 180° or half a turn or τ/2 radians. I think the confusion is that radians are dimensionless so strictly speaking (from a dimensional analysis standpoint) the symbol "radians" is equal to one, and simply included for clarity. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Disagree. In the row with degrees we have 180° with a number and a unit. So in the row labelled turns we should have 1/2 turns and not 1/2. If we use τ as a symbol for turn we get 1/2 τ. Since τ may also just be interpreted as a number the turn row and the radian row become identical so the dichotomy between using turns and using radians disappear. Therefore I find the extra row redundant. --Entropeter (talk) 18:56, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I kinda agree with you. I think to be most pedantic we would remove the degree symbol across that row and the ^g symbol across that row. Then the row labels would give the units for the row. I think that would be more confusing than what we have now. I wouldn't mind having "0 turns, 1/12 turn, ..., 1 turn" on the fist row, but to algebraically substitute "τ = 1 turn" in the "turns" row, writing "0 τ, ..., 1 τ", changes that row from units of turns (a dimensionless unit we want ranging from 0 to 1) to units of radians (a different dimensionless unit. I think it's dangerously easy to confuse people here. While τ "is" one turn, it is not algebraically true that τ = 1 turn; Rather, τ = 2&pi = 6.283... radians, and 6.283... radians is one turn. —Ben FrantzDale (talk) 18:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Whether or not dimensional analysis has units of angle, we need to specify the angular units here because otherwise people can't use the information, and that's true in general. For example Hertz are explicitly cycles per second, not radians per second.

Pi is unitless, and Tau also (since it's simply 2 Pi). One turn is clearly Tau radians and not Tau degrees for example. -Rememberway (talk) 00:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree. How about something like this though:

Units	Values
Turns	0	1/12	1/10	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/2	3/4	1
Radians	0	${\tfrac {\tau }{12}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{10}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{8}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{6}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{5}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{4}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{2}}$	${\tfrac {3}{4}}\tau$	$\tau \,$
	0	${\tfrac {1}{6}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{4}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{3}}\pi$	${\tfrac {2}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{2}}\pi$	$\pi \,$	${\tfrac {3}{2}}\pi$	$2\pi \,$
Degrees	0°	30°	36°	45°	60°	72°	90°	180°	270°	360°
Grads	0g	33⅓g	40g	50g	66⅔g	80g	100g	200g	300g	400g

But maybe that's just redundant? - 193.84.186.81 (talk) 11:26, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

The real question here is: "Can we find someone like Euler or or Newton using it in Tau in their work?" If so, the table should look more like:

Units	Values
Turns	0	${\tfrac {\tau }{12}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{10}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{8}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{6}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{5}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{4}}$	${\tfrac {\tau }{2}}$	${\tfrac {3}{4}}\tau$	$\tau \,$
Radians	0	${\tfrac {1}{6}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{4}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{3}}\pi$	${\tfrac {2}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{2}}\pi$	$\pi \,$	${\tfrac {3}{2}}\pi$	$2\pi \,$
Degrees	0°	30°	36°	45°	60°	72°	90°	180°	270°	360°
Grads	0g	33⅓g	40g	50g	66⅔g	80g	100g	200g	300g	400g

Glas(talk)Nice User skin 03:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

But $\tau \,$ is only 1 full turn in terms of radians. When you say turns you mean full revolutions, so 1 full turn is just that: 1. Radians divided by tau is equal to the number of full turns, maybe we should put them together? Hence:

Units	Values
Turns or Radians divided by $\tau \,$	0	1/12	1/10	1/8	1/6	1/5	1/4	1/2	3/4	1
Degrees (°)	0	30	36	45	60	72	90	180	270	360
Radians	0	${\tfrac {1}{6}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{4}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{3}}\pi$	${\tfrac {2}{5}}\pi$	${\tfrac {1}{2}}\pi$	$\pi \,$	${\tfrac {3}{2}}\pi$	$2\pi \,$
Grads (g)	0	33⅓	40	50	66⅔	80	100	200	300	400

Finbob83 (talk) 14:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

There's no need to add it. τ is just a numeric measure, like π, so most logically would go in the 'radians' row. Except π is used there already. Adding τ there is redundant. Added anywhere else it fits less well and is also redundant. It's not used in mainstream textbooks or teaching, so no-one will be helped if it's added, it's just unnecessary clutter.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 15:25, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Not only does τ in 'radians' correspond to it's number of turns, but there is no other symbol for turns. It only feels natural to have one; τ=2π=360°=400^g. Do you write 100 or €100? I don't know about you, but I would prefer to receive €100 over c100. Turn is the only row in the table with no symbol, SOMETHING belongs there.Glas(talk)Nice User skin 02:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

"Euler's" identity

FWIW I didn't explain it very well, but the form of Euler's identity:

$e^{i\tau }=1(+0)$

Is equivalent to saying that a single turn is an identity operation. -Rememberway (talk) 16:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

To me the big problem with the text removed here is that it just throws out a formula. It doesn't explain what complex exponentiation has to do with rotation (or identity), or even that rotation and full turns are involved here. (The +0 is particularly hard to fit into an encyclopedia—even the tau day manifesto calls it "somewhat tongue-in-cheek"). Kingdon (talk) 01:37, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

Tau proposal revert quote

"τ is the radian angle measure for one turn of a circle." (below figure 8 http://tauday.com/tau-manifesto#fig-tau_angles )