Talk:Surface area
| WikiProject Mathematics (Rated Start-Class) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. | |||
| Mathematics rating: | Start Class | High Priority | Field: Geometry |
|
Please update this rating as the article progresses, or if the rating is inaccurate. |
|||
Contents |
[edit] Two dimensions
Is it really correct that two dimensional structures such as triangles have "surface area" ? I do not think so, "surface area" is a three dimensional concept. Ar
- I've moved the table of areas of plane figures to the talk page of "Area". Arcfrk (talk) 08:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Surface Area To Volume Ratios
There is a problem with the last section. It states that if you increase the radius the ratio decreases. However, if you change the units of measure, the ratio can increase with a larger radius. A radius of 100 meters has a SA:V ratio of .03, but a radius of 1 kilometer has a ratio of 3. Also, it should be clear that this is assuming cells have a spherical shape. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.188.231.137 (talk) 04:05, 30 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- SA:V is measured in inverse distance units. It is not dimensionless. A sphere with a radius of 100 meters has a ratio of 0.03/meter while the sphere with a radius of 1 kilometer has a ratio of 3/kilometer = 3/(1000 meters) = 0.003/meter. Measuring in the same units, the sphere ten times larger has a ten times smaller ratio, as it should. This similarity law holds for any shape, not just spheres. In the case of cells the only assumption is that a big cell is the same shape as a little one. This is more or less true of cells. It is definitely not true of multicellular structures, which is why one can easily distinguish a mouse bone from an elephant bone even when the mouse bone is magnified to elephantine size. -Dmh (talk) 05:32, 23
And I am SMART —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.112.37.98 (talk) 22:33, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
[edit] What. The. Hell.
I came here to verify a formula, but I ended up stumbling upon a page a 4th grader could have written. What in the world happened to this article?
S lijin (talk) 01:54, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
- I came here to verify a formula, but I ended up stumbling upon a page a professor could have written. What in the world happened to this article? i can not understand any of this, perhaps someone could submit something eaiser to understand Summer911 (talk) 05:32, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
[edit] Moved from the article
| Shape | Area formula derivation |
|---|---|
| Sphere | The surface area of a sphere is the integral of infinitesimal circular rings of width
|
. The length of the circular ring is equal to 
, which leads to 

is equal to 
= 

![2\pi r[r-(-r)] = 4\pi r^2](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/math/1/b/3/1b37390f2cdf8d4e45a7cf9bf2f7f4b2.png)