4 ms·
Should not be described as points on a circumference? Doing it about points in a circle made me think of a different problem (which is also interesting) (Just
by jaimebuelta 13y ago
Should not be described as points on a circumference?
Doing it about points in a circle made me think of a different problem (which is also interesting)
(Just to clarify, the circumference is the line that contains a circle. I assume that won't be misnamed in a geometry problem of this kind)
- gsteinb88 13y agoCanonically, a circle is the set of points equidistant from a given point (the center of the circle). The set of points inside the circle is known as a disc. Generalizing slightly, a circle is a 1-sphere and a disc is a ball in 2 dimensions. So no, the post has it correct. In fact, circumference is the scalar value corresponding to the length of the circle. This relies on significantly more structure (i.e. having a metric) than the terms circle and disc.
- JackFr 13y agoIf you're doing stuff with point sets, "unit circle" typically refers to the point set satisfying x^2 + y^2 =1, the "unit disc" or "unit ball" would be used to refer to the point set satisfying x^2 + y^2 < 1 (open unit ball) x^2 + y^2 <= 1 (closed unit ball).