Math Myth: Parallels do not intersect

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
3 replies · 2K views
Messages
19,952
Reaction score
11,044
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.