(Context, calculus 3)
The definition of curvature I get: "How fast a curve is changing direction at a point" (Source)
But the precise definition(s) I don't understand. My book has a particularly awful definition and does not define what a "unit tangent vector" is and simply assumes you can figure it out; Forgive me if I'm missing some supporting material.
The definitions I've seen:
$$K = \| \frac{dT}{ds} \|$$
$$K = \frac{ \| T'(t) \| }{ \| r'(t) \|} $$
I'll take a stab at illustrating my confusion with each.
First: Seems to be the "rate of the change of the tangent unit vector with respect to the arc length". I suppose this one makes a sort of sense, since you can get an "average" tangent vector by making a secant line between [a,b] over some arc length s and then taking the limit to get an "instantaneous curvature". But search me why the magnitude of this would be a measurement of curvature.
Second: Seems to be "the magnitude of the derivative of the tangent vector function (r(s(t)) divided by the derivative of the of the vector equation (r(t))" for some reason. This one I have no idea on.
Wikipedia has a nice writeup and uses circles to define it (which my book does not), it's definition here is particularly helpful:
Given any curve C and a point P on it, there is a unique circle or line which most closely approximates the curve near P, the osculating circle at P. The curvature of C at P is then defined to be the curvature of that circle or line. The radius of curvature is defined as the reciprocal of the curvature.
But then fails to define how this definition leads into the above definitions.
There's one similar post here on stackexchange, but the answer is very confusing:
I won't attempt further diagrams, but now think in 2-dimensions - you will need two different sized circles at every point in order to describe the curvature of the surface at that point.
How and why would you possible need "two different sized circles" to describe curvature? The figure they use is nearly identical to the wikipedia article and only uses one circle per point, but also fails to describe how we get from there to the definitions above.
For the answer I'd like to request: diagrams using the circle approach, as seen above. Thank you.
Edit:
Thanks very much to help from whacka in explaining his answer, chatroom log here. I chose the answer I got from UC Davis as it explains the solution clearly and concisely with a minimum of extra experience required to understand. I did however give whacka's answer an upvote, since it appears to be popular; I assume because it's a good answer for those with more experience than I have, I'm not fit to judge.
After some digging on google, I found this from UC Davis, I'll copy the relevant details here for posterity with my own notes. Feel free to make corrections as my explanations are no doubt not sufficiently precise or may be incorrect in some places, I blame my own ignorance:
$$ \vec{T}^{\,} = \frac{dr}{dt} $$
I made a small change from the source material here here to illustrate that T is a vector. r(t) (the parametric equation of some curve) should get you a vector, so r'(t) should also return a vector. dr/dt is the derivative of r(t), in this case the "velocity" vector of the curve at the point t; I hadn't been exposed to thinking about derivatives of r(t) as velocity and acceleration (etc) prior to this.
$$ \hat{T} = \frac{\vec{T}^{\,}}{\| \vec{T}^{\,} \|} = \frac{dr/dt}{\| dr/dt \|} $$
Where we make a unit vector ($\hat{T}$) by dividing $\vec{T}^{\,}$ by its magnitude. The dr/dt notation is just "unpacking" the definition of $\vec{T}^{\,}$.
Here the page's notation becomes difficult to follow, simply put $|dr/dt|$ is the absolute value of $dr/dt$, while $\| dr/dt \|$ is the magnitude. I've made an effort to address that here, but if you were to follow the link (above) you would see no difference in the notation for magnitude and absolute value.
$$ \hat{T} = \frac{velocity}{speed} = \frac{dr/dt}{ds/dt}$$
I can't make heads or tails of what follows (some sort of discussion about the "unit tangent vector in terms of arc length"), but we'll be using a definition in the next part, so in summary:
$$ \hat{T} = \frac{dr}{ds} $$
Which we can arrive at from our above equation by "canceling" the dt's:
$$ \hat{T} =\frac{dr/dt}{ds/dt} $$
simplify the complex fraction:
$$ \hat{T} =\frac{dr}{dt} * \frac{dt}{ds} = \frac{dr}{ds} $$
$$ \kappa = \| \frac{d^2r}{ds^2} \| $$
The wording is a little weird, but I believe I can sum it up:
We get the direction that the curve is curving from $\hat{T}$ (the unit tangent vector)
If we then find out how fast the direction of $\hat{T}$ is changing at a given point, we know the curvature.
Since if the direction is changing rapidly (a tight curve) our $\kappa$ is large and if our direction is hardly changing at all (a straight line or shallow curve) then our $\kappa$ is small. Which describes what behavior we want from $\kappa$.
Essentially the magnitude of the "acceleration" of the curve at a given point is its curvature.
What follows in the discussion is some tedious algebra to make the equations "nicer" to compute with, summarized here:
$$ \kappa = \frac{1}{\| v \|} \| \frac{d\hat{T}}{dt} \| $$
(So we can get $\hat{T}$ in terms of t)
$$ \kappa(t) = \frac{\| r'(t) \times r''(t)\|}{\| r'(t) \|^3} $$
(then stricly in terms of r(t))
$$ \kappa(t) = \frac{\| \hat{T} '(t) \|}{\| r'(t) \|} $$
(then in terms of T and r(t). The Latex is a little wonky for the notation of "derivative of T-hat" [numerator].)