New way to find the Circumference of a Circle

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter MacCormaic
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circle Circumference
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the possibility of deriving the circumference of a circle using measurements from geometrical shapes placed within the circle. Participants explore various mathematical concepts, including constructible numbers and transcendental numbers, while debating the validity of the proposed method.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that adding measurements from points A, B, C, and D could yield the circumference of a circle.
  • Another participant calculates that the proposed method results in a value close to but not equal to \(2\pi\), indicating a discrepancy.
  • A participant questions the validity of using compass-and-straightedge constructions to derive \(\pi\), stating that \(\pi\) is a transcendental number and cannot be constructed.
  • Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of using geometrical shapes to approximate the circumference, with one noting that certain measurements may not be whole numbers.
  • There is a discussion about the concept of squaring the circle and whether the proposed method is akin to this impossibility.
  • One participant reflects on the nature of measurements and the potential for them to be transcendental numbers, raising questions about the relationship between geometrical shapes and the circumference.
  • Another participant emphasizes that while one can get arbitrarily close to \(\pi\), it is impossible to construct it exactly using traditional methods.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the feasibility of deriving the circumference from other geometrical shapes, with some arguing that it is akin to squaring the circle, while others explore the idea more openly. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the validity of the initial proposal.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference the mathematical definitions surrounding constructible numbers and transcendental numbers, noting that these concepts play a crucial role in the discussion. There are also mentions of the limitations of traditional geometric constructions in relation to \(\pi\).

MacCormaic
While I haven't the right technology to find out if the measurement is absolute, it seems that by adding the measurements of A, B, C and D together, you get the circumference of a circle.

(image attached)
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20150106_143512.jpg
    IMG_20150106_143512.jpg
    15.8 KB · Views: 480
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Nope, I'm afraid that gives you

$$2 + \frac{6}{\sqrt{2}} \approx 6.242\ldots$$
assuming a circle of radius 1. This is kind of close to ##2 \pi \approx 6.283\ldots##, but not especially close.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic
Thanks for that Ben. There are several other measurements within the design which brings the measure very close, so it has made me wonder if it is possible to find the circumference of a circle by placing squares inside the circle.
 
"Design"? All you did was draw a picture. Since you are doing compass-and-straightedge constructions, every marked length in your diagram is a constructible number. ##\pi## is not even algebraic, let alone constructible, so nothing you can do with a compass and straightedge will ever yield ##\pi##. This was mathematically proven quite some time ago.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic
Well Ben I'll be the first to admit I know absolutely nothing about Maths or Geometry or Transcendental numbers. The drawing was merely inspired by reading the book on Infinity by Brian Clegg. While I accept that a circle can't be measured by straight edge and compass, some of the points within the sketch are not whole numbers. I was reading that a computer recently was able to record 13 trillion decimal points in finding the absolute circumference and that there was still a infinity of digits that could be added on. I wasn't trying to prove that a Circle could be squared, I was merely asking if it's possible that the circumference can be derived from another geometrical shaped placed within the circle, where some of the points have decimal measurements. But thanks for working out the equation showing that it was off by a fraction (which is a huge fraction when the circle becomes larger). I do find it difficult to believe that a circumference can't be measured to an absolute number.
 
MacCormaic said:
I wasn't trying to prove that a Circle could be squared, I was merely asking if it's possible that the circumference can be derived from another geometrical shaped placed within the circle...
What this statement says is "I wasn't trying to square the circle, I was just trying to do the same thing as squaring the circle".
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic
No, what I asking is, is it possible that there can be a measurement between two points in a geometrical shape (or number of shapes), that when added together with a number of other measurements could make up the equivalent of the circumference of a circle. For example in the attached sketch I would assume that line A from points x + y are never absolute numbers when lines B & C are absolute; so it is possible that the percentage they are off could make them a transcendental number?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20150106_185237.jpg
    IMG_20150106_185237.jpg
    14.7 KB · Views: 446
MacCormaic said:
No, what I asking is, is it possible that there can be a measurement between two points in a geometrical shape (or number of shapes), that when added together with a number of other measurements could make up the equivalent of the circumference of a circle.

Exactly. You are asking if it is possible to do the equivalent of squaring the circle.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic
  • #10
If I draw a number line, I know PI lies between 3 and 4 but there is no way to construct an intersection that will cross the number line at PI. I can get arbitrarily close but I can never say definitively that the intersection is PI. It has to do with constructible numbers and PI being transcendental can't be constructed.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic
  • #11
Ok, so the mathematical definition you are saying is that any attempt to find the measurement using lines is termed an attempt to square the circle, which is absolutely impossible. Thanks for the imput.
 
  • #12
MacCormaic said:
Ok, so the mathematical definition you are saying is that any attempt to find the measurement using lines is termed an attempt to square the circle, which is absolutely impossible. Thanks for the imput.
Exactly.

Think about it this way. If you can use a compass and ruler to construct a set of straight lines which when added up equal the circumference of a circle, you can just to this:

Using the same compass/ruler, transfer the line segments all onto one straight line. Divide that line into 4 equal parts (trivial with compass/ruler). You now have the sides of a square, the perimeter of which is the same as the circumference of the original circle. This is called squaring the circle. It is not possible.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: MacCormaic

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K