How to Construct a 1 Degree Arc Using a Given 19 Degree Arc?

AI Thread Summary
To construct a 1-degree arc using a given 19-degree arc, one method involves creating a larger angle by repeating the 19-degree arc multiple times. By constructing a 190-degree angle and halving it, one can derive an 80-degree angle, which can then be halved further to yield a 20-degree angle. By superimposing this 20-degree angle onto the 19-degree arc, a 1-degree arc can be obtained through subtraction. However, some participants noted that using only a compass complicates the process, as dividing angles typically requires a straightedge. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the challenge of achieving precise angle divisions with limited tools.
mishaark
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Exercise #27 from a textbook called Kiselev's Geometry / Book I. Planimetry:

Using only compass, construct a 1 degree arc on a circle, if a 19 degree arc of this circle is given.Please, check my reasoning on this one. I just want to make sure that I'm getting it right.

My solution:
Using a pair of compasses, we can only divide an angle in half. So long as we are given a 19 degree arc, we cannot really apply this method because we will end up having angles with fractional parts. But if we take a 19 degree angle 10 times we will get the angle of 190 degrees which we can divide in half and get an 80 degree angle, which in turn divided in half will give us a 40 degree angle, which again divided in half will give us a 20 degree angle. Now we can superimpose this 20 degree angle onto the 19 degree angle, which will give us by subtraction a 1 degree angle, that is a 1 degree arc.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi mishaark! welcome to pf! :smile:

(have a degree: ° :wink:)
mishaark said:
… we will get the angle of 190 degrees which we can divide in half and get an 80 degree angle …

you haven't actually said how you get from 190° to 80° :wink:

(but isn't there an easy way of getting 18° ?)
 


You can make a 15 degree angle also by dividing a 60 degree angle twice then subtract it from 19. Then divide the remainder twice.
 
coolul007 said:
You can make a 15 degree angle also by dividing a 60 degree angle twice then subtract it from 19. Then divide the remainder twice.

In order to divide angle by 2 required compass and straight, thus none of the solutions above will satisfy condition to use compass only.

My solution is to draw circle with center at the vertex of the angle. Using compass measure chord of 19 degrees and add it to the original chord 18 times the result angle is 19*19 = 361 degrees from original point. The rest is obvious.
 
  • Like
Likes mfb, olivermsun and jbriggs444
According to this Mohr–Mascheroni theorem one can use compass only if compass and straight edge can be constructed.
 
  • Like
Likes mfb
Alexander Glauberzon said:
In order to divide angle by 2 required compass and straight, thus none of the solutions above will satisfy condition to use compass only.

My solution is to draw circle with center at the vertex of the angle. Using compass measure chord of 19 degrees and add it to the original chord 18 times the result angle is 19*19 = 361 degrees from original point. The rest is obvious.
Yup, I think you have the correct solution. For construction the problem gives you a 19° arc of the circle, so all you have to do is "copy" the arc around the circle with your compass.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top