Re: parametric: x = cos(t), y = sin(t)

In article <WJ6dnYfJNOAGzMbanZ2dnUVZ_hisnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Darrell wrote:

>> So it seems to me that the problem is whether we should let the word
>> ``angle'' stand for measures between 0 and 180 or any number? I would
be
>> happy with a definition that states that angles are equivalence cl*****
>> with the angles whose measures lie in [0,360) being the representatives
>> of the cl***** --- if this can be done as my intuition says so.
>
> Don't confuse "angle" with a measure.  An angle is a mathematical 
> object.  Its measure is another thing entirely.
>
> Going back to an angle in standard position, as previously explained, 
> would you say an angle of 360deg is equivalent to and angle of 0?  Or to

> an angle of -360deg?

Both equivalent to zero.