Easier Method to Calculate Earth's Circumference

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on two methods for calculating the circumference of the Earth, specifically Eratosthenes' method and an alternative method presented by a professor. Eratosthenes' approach involves measuring the angle of the shadow cast by a stick when the sun is directly overhead at a specific location, allowing for geometric calculations to determine the Earth's circumference. The alternative method suggested by the professor involves measuring the angles of shadows cast by two sticks at different locations, potentially simplifying the process by eliminating the need for direct overhead sunlight. However, there are uncertainties regarding the orientation of the sticks and the accuracy of the alternative method, particularly in relation to the cardinal directions and the timing of shadow measurements. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding both methods and their implications for accurately calculating the Earth's circumference.
marcusau
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
My professor was showing us how to calculate the Circumference of the Earth using Eratosthenes method, as shown here. I completely understand this method. http://www.bsin.k12.nm.us/Curriculum/CAP/completed%20files/astronomy/completed%20files/eratosthenescircumf.html

However he told us he had an easier method and to use it. I'm not sure if it works, however. I have attached the slide from his lecture that explains what he was saying to do. I understand Eratosthene's method because the sun's rays are directly over the southern most stick and the shadow cast by the northern stick then can be used to find the angle that subtends the arc, which is the distance between the two sticks.

I suppose using his method you have to measure the angle cast by both sticks using a protractor, rather than having the option to use geometry like in the original.

Also, I am not sure about the direction of the shadow cast by the sun based on the way he has the sticks are oriented, given the cardinal directions given in the diagram.

Thanks for any help or input.
 

Attachments

  • eratosthene.jpg
    eratosthene.jpg
    31.3 KB · Views: 868
Last edited by a moderator:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
The diagram looks like the same method, just that the Sun need not be directly overhead as in your description and the one in your link. It is the difference between the two shadows that counts - if you wait for one of the shadows to have no length, then the math is probably easier.
 
On August 10, 2025, there was a massive landslide on the eastern side of Tracy Arm fjord. Although some sources mention 1000 ft tsunami, that height represents the run-up on the sides of the fjord. Technically it was a seiche. Early View of Tracy Arm Landslide Features Tsunami-causing slide was largest in decade, earthquake center finds https://www.gi.alaska.edu/news/tsunami-causing-slide-was-largest-decade-earthquake-center-finds...
Hello, I’m currently writing a series of essays on Pangaea, continental drift, and Earth’s geological cycles. While working on my research, I’ve come across some inconsistencies in the existing theories — for example, why the main pressure seems to have been concentrated in the northern polar regions. So I’m curious: is there any data or evidence suggesting that an external cosmic body (an asteroid, comet, or another massive object) could have influenced Earth’s geology in the distant...
Back
Top