Flat surface to curved surface

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter anilswipe
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the theoretical conversion of a flat piece of paper into a perfect sphere, focusing on the surface area comparison between the two shapes. Participants explore the implications of this transformation, including the mathematical relationships and potential paradoxes involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant inquires about the difference in surface area between a flat piece of paper and a perfect sphere made from it, seeking a general formula for this comparison.
  • Another participant asserts that it is impossible to create a sphere from a flat piece of paper without overlapping, suggesting that cutting the paper into small pieces could allow for an approximate sphere of the same total area.
  • A subsequent reply acknowledges the previous point but clarifies that the original intent was not to create an approximate sphere but to consider a perfect transformation.
  • Further, a participant reiterates the assumption of a perfect sphere made from 100% of the original paper and questions whether the calculated surface area of the sphere would equal the original area of the paper.
  • Another participant introduces the Banach-Tarski paradox as a related concept, discussing the implications of area and volume in the context of the transformation and noting the challenges of defining the problem in two dimensions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of transforming a flat surface into a sphere, with some asserting it is impossible while others explore theoretical implications. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the mathematical relationships and the applicability of concepts like the Banach-Tarski paradox.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in defining a well-posed problem regarding area preservation in the transformation from flat to spherical surfaces, particularly in the context of measurable areas and the nature of the shapes involved.

anilswipe
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody,

Suppose I take a paper of say surface area A.

Then I would somehow (Do what it takes to do it; cut, fold whatever but no overlapping.) make an ideally and theoretically, biggest possible, perfect sphere out of it. Let's say the surface area of this sphere is A'.

Now how much is the difference between the surface area of the two?

Is there a general formula to find this?

In lay man's terms:
Suppose I take a plane paper and convert it into a sphere without overlapping, how much paper will be leftover? What is the generalized mathematical formula, if there is one, to find the difference between the surface areas of the two?

Thank you.

PS: Though I have chosen the suffix 'Intermediate', (assuming, possibly wrongly, that there may not be High school grade answers to this) I would gladly invite Basic High school grade answers if possible, to keep things simpler and I would invite higher grade answers, if absolutely necessary.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You can't make a sphere from a flat piece of paper. For the same reason you can't flatten out a spherical surface.

That said, if you cut the paper up into small very pieces and stuck them all together, you could get an approximate sphere of the same total area.
 
PeroK said:
That said, if you cut the paper up into small very pieces and stuck them all together, you could get an approximate sphere of the same total area.
I get it, but I suppose , that is not what I want to do and which also means that I have not been able to put my thought across. I apologize for that and would edit the post to that effect. Thanks for the reply.
 
OK. One more step into the topic.

Assuming the spere is perfect and made of 100 % of the original piece paper. It will have its radium, and its calculated surface area. On the other hand, the paper has its area before being turned into a sphere.

Will the calculated spheric area equal to the original area of the plane paper?
 
Gang said:
OK. One more step into the topic.

Assuming the spere is perfect and made of 100 % of the original piece paper. It will have its radium, and its calculated surface area. On the other hand, the paper has its area before being turned into a sphere.

Will the calculated spheric area equal to the original area of the plane paper?
Are you trying to ask whether something like the Banach-Tarski paradox might apply?

In the Banach-Tarski paradox, one shreds a solid (3 dimensional) sphere into a finite collection of subsets and the re-assembles the subsets into two spheres, each equal in volume to the original.

Importantly, the subsets are sufficiently "weird" so that they are not Lebesgue-measurable. So one cannot argue that the measure of the union is necessarily equal to the sum of the measures.

Obviously we are talking about two dimensions here and Banach-Tarski works in three. And we have the niggling problem that we have flat sets that we are trying to plop onto a spherical surface. So the problem is not even well defined to start with. (How can you require an area-preserving flat to spherical mapping function without having a shape with a measurable area).
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 162 ·
6
Replies
162
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K