Leibniz: Circle Most Capacious Isoperimetric Shape

  • Thread starter a monad
  • Start date
In summary, Leibniz argues that a circle is the most capacious of all isoperimetric shapes, meaning it has the greatest surface area for a given perimeter. This is a necessary truth, independent of human thought, and therefore there must exist a necessary being that embodies this truth. This necessary being is not limited by time or space and contains all realities within itself.
  • #1
a monad
2
0
Leibniz says the following: "It is true, or rather it is necessary, that a circle is the most capacious of isoperimetric shapes, even if no circle really exists" in the opening line of a lengthy proof he gives for God's existence.

I took calculus in college, but I don't recall what exactly these terms mean. By "most capacious" I assume he means having the most space in it, but what exactly are "isoperimetric shapes"? And why is a circle the most capacious of them? Google gives me nothing!
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I hope we're going to discuss math in this thread and not the existence of God.

But anyway, I think you're looking for the isoperimetric inequality. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoperimetric_inequality

It means that of all curves with a given perimeter, the circle has the greatest surface area.
 
  • #3
micromass said:
I hope we're going to discuss math in this thread and not the existence of God.

But anyway, I think you're looking for the isoperimetric inequality. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isoperimetric_inequality

It means that of all curves with a given perimeter, the circle has the greatest surface area.

I'm still not sure I fully understand.

Though any necessary geometrical truth will suffice for the proof of God in Leibniz. The full text is as follows:

It is true, or rather it is necessary, that a circle is the most capacious of isoperimetric shapes, even if no circle really exists.
Likewise if neither I nor you nor anyone else of us exists. Likewise even if none of those things exist which are contingent, or in which no necessity is understood, such as is the visible world and other similar things.
Therefore because this truth does not depend on our thinking, it is necessary that there is something real in it.
And because that truth is eternal or necessary, this reality that is in it independent of our thinking will also exist from eternity.
This reality is a certain existence in actuality. For this actual truth always subsists in actuality objectively.
Therefore a necessary being exists, or one from whose essence there is existence.
To put it more briefly: the truth of necessary propositions is eternal. Truth is a certain reality independent of our thinking. Certainly some eternal reality always exists. That is, the truth of necessary propositions always exists. Therefore some necessary being exists.
Whatever exists is possible. Some necessary being exists. Therefore some necessary being is possible.
The minor is proved thus: whatever in actuality is objective, that exists. A certain necessary thing is in actuality objective. Therefore a certain necessary thing exists.
I prove the minor again: the truth of necessary propositions is in actuality objective. The truth of necessary propositions is necessary. Therefore a certain necessary thing is in actuality objective.
From this it is evident that there are as many necessary things as there are necessary truths. These necessities can be combined, anyone to any one, because any two propositions can be connected to prove a new one, when the means of joining them have been added.
(A difficulty is that the same proposition can be demonstrated in many ways. Yet there are not many causes of the same thing.)
Therefore all realities existing in eternal truths, with no one thinking about them, will have some real connection to each other.
Truths arise from natures or essences. Therefore even essences or natures are certain realities, always existing.
The same nature comes together to form innumerable others, and is able to come together with any other.
Those realities that are in natures in reality, or as they say objectively, are not distinguished by time and place. Because they combine.
The objective realities of conceivable natures and of truths are likewise the same in many other respects.
Those realities are not substances.
A substance existing by necessity is unlimited, i.e. it contains all realities in itself.
Plato, dialogue 10 of the Laws - the soul is what moves itself.

Still, I'd like to fully understand the example he gives.
 
  • #4
A lot of what you posted is philosophy, which cannot be discussed in a mathematics forum.

Perhaps you can say specifically what you don't understand, because it's not very clear to me.
 
  • #5


I can provide some clarification on Leibniz's statement. Isoperimetric shapes are shapes that have the same perimeter or circumference, but different areas. In other words, they have the same "boundary" but different "interiors." For example, a square and a circle can have the same perimeter, but the circle will have a larger area. This concept is often studied in mathematics and physics, as it has real-world applications such as in the optimization of materials and structures.

Now, Leibniz is stating that a circle is the most capacious of all isoperimetric shapes, meaning it has the largest area for a given perimeter. This can be proven mathematically, and it has to do with the fact that a circle has a constant curvature, which allows it to "pack" the most area within a given boundary. This is also why circles are often used in nature to optimize space, such as in the arrangement of cells in a honeycomb or the shape of soap bubbles.

It is interesting that Leibniz brings up the existence of a circle, as it is a mathematical concept that can be applied to the physical world. However, in the context of his proof for God's existence, he may be suggesting that the perfection and optimality of the circle points to a divine creator. This is a philosophical interpretation of his statement and may not necessarily align with scientific reasoning.

In conclusion, Leibniz's statement about the circle being the most capacious of isoperimetric shapes has a mathematical basis and can be proven. However, his connection to God's existence is a philosophical interpretation and not a scientific one.
 

1. What is the "Leibniz: Circle Most Capacious Isoperimetric Shape"?

The "Leibniz: Circle Most Capacious Isoperimetric Shape" is a mathematical concept developed by the German philosopher and mathematician, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. It refers to the shape with the largest area for a given perimeter, also known as the isoperimetric problem.

2. Why is this concept important?

The isoperimetric problem has been studied by mathematicians for centuries because it has many practical applications, such as optimizing the shape of a container to hold the maximum amount of liquid or determining the most efficient shape for a bridge. It also has philosophical implications, as Leibniz believed that this problem demonstrated the perfection of God's design in nature.

3. How did Leibniz approach this problem?

Leibniz developed a geometric proof using infinitesimal calculus to show that a circle is the most capacious isoperimetric shape. He also proposed a more general solution using variational calculus, which involves finding the maximum or minimum of a functional.

4. Has the "Leibniz: Circle Most Capacious Isoperimetric Shape" been proven to be true?

While Leibniz's geometric proof has been widely accepted, his variational calculus approach has been a subject of debate among mathematicians. Some have proposed alternative solutions, but the circle remains the most widely accepted solution to the isoperimetric problem.

5. Are there any other famous mathematicians who have studied this problem?

Yes, many other mathematicians have contributed to the study of the isoperimetric problem, including Archimedes, Newton, and Euler. However, Leibniz's contributions are considered particularly significant due to his use of infinitesimal calculus, which was a groundbreaking development in mathematics.

Similar threads

  • General Math
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • Art, Music, History, and Linguistics
3
Replies
95
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
  • Feedback and Announcements
Replies
25
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
7
Views
2K
Back
Top