Difference between revisions of "Talk:1230: Polar/Cartesian"
JamesCurran (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
The title text is, well, wrong. To plot coordinates "as a function of time" you would need THREE-axes. [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 19:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC) | The title text is, well, wrong. To plot coordinates "as a function of time" you would need THREE-axes. [[User:JamesCurran|JamesCurran]] ([[User talk:JamesCurran|talk]]) 19:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC) | ||
+ | :No, we have a radius (from the zero point to the red line), we have an angel (from 0° to 90°), and we have a point moving along that red line by time. A single (not moving) ant would just be a (red) point.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:56, 26 June 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 20:56, 26 June 2013
Heh. Schroedinger's graph. Simultaneously 100% certainty of being Cartesian and 100% certainty of being Polar. 12.117.213.34 09:03, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
Isn't this a Polar graph? If it's a Cartesian, doesn't it end at 0%? As the line goes farther to the right, more time has passed instead of the "certainty" changing. --Clayton 12.202.74.87 14:18, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
If you take into account 833, this graph shows certainty that you are interpreting it correctly. --DiEvAl (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The ambiguity is due to the unlabelled x-axis. --Prooffreader (talk) 10:48, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
The title text protip is really only applicable to 2 axes continuous graphes, unless you count ants being added or flicked away by the user as discontinuities. 24.247.120.53 13:07, 26 June 2013 (UTC)ProfKrueger
The shape of the graph appears to be (in polar form) r(t)=100/(1+sin(t)), which I solved for using the constraint that r + y = 100, or rather (polar-observer's certainty that the graph is polar) + (cartesian-observer's certainty that the graph is polar) = 100%. The two observers become further entrenched in their own ideologies as time goes on, and at equivalent rates of entrenchment. 98.197.196.242 16:25, 26 June 2013 (UTC) DAF
The title text is, well, wrong. To plot coordinates "as a function of time" you would need THREE-axes. JamesCurran (talk) 19:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)