Math Myth: Parallels do not intersect

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of parallel lines and their intersection in different geometrical contexts, including Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries. Participants explore definitions and implications of parallelism in various settings, including practical examples like railroad tracks.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that while railroad tracks are considered parallel in Euclidean geometry, they may appear to intersect at the horizon or at infinity, suggesting a different perspective on parallelism.
  • Others argue that on a spherical surface, railroad tracks are not straight lines but arcs, and if they are modeled as great circles, they will intersect at a significant distance from their starting point.
  • There is a suggestion that the definition of parallel lines should not solely rely on the criterion of non-intersection, as this is specific to 3D Euclidean geometry, prompting a search for a more universal definition applicable across different geometries.
  • One participant emphasizes that the appropriate definition of parallel lines may depend on the specific context or application for which it is needed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of parallel lines and their intersection, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain without a clear consensus on a universal definition.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the limitations of traditional definitions of parallel lines when applied to non-Euclidean geometries and the potential need for context-specific definitions.

Messages
19,873
Reaction score
10,875
From @fresh_42's Insight
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/10-math-things-we-all-learnt-wrong-at-school/

Please discuss!

Have you ever stood on a railroad track? Nobody would deny that the rails are in parallel. Do they intersect? Certainly not soon because locomotives normally do not derail. However, you will likely have looked to the horizon while standing on the rails. And - surprise - they do intersect at the horizon, or mathematically: at infinity. But infinity on a ball where we live isn't at infinity. It is actually somewhere. We see that there are possible geometries, in which parallels do intersect.

parallels.png
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
High School Geometry is 99% Euclidean. And in that context, parallel lines do not intersect. If you are taking about railroad tracks on a spherical surface, technically they are not lines, but arcs following the spherical surface. If you make railroad tracks great circles, the will intersect about 6000 miles from their usable zone.
 
Less controversial is that we should not define parallel lines to be a pair of lines that do not intersect - since this is the case in 3D Euclidean Geometry, which is a familiar topic. So what is the best definition for "parallel lines" from the viewpoint of making a definition that works well in all types of geometries?
 
Stephen Tashi said:
Less controversial is that we should not define parallel lines to be a pair of lines that do not intersect - since this is the case in 3D Euclidean Geometry, which is a familiar topic. So what is the best definition for "parallel lines" from the viewpoint of making a definition that works well in all types of geometries?
It would depend on what you need the definition for.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 142 ·
5
Replies
142
Views
10K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
8K