Number of vertices of an n-gon as n tends to infinity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter cmos
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Infinity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the behavior of the number of vertices in a regular n-sided polygon as n approaches infinity. As n increases, the interior angles of the polygon approach 180°, leading to the conclusion that while the number of vertices increases monotonically, it paradoxically drops to zero at the limit of infinity, where the polygon becomes a circle. The circle, being a smooth curve, has no vertices, illustrating a discontinuity in the function representing the number of vertices. This highlights the distinction between approaching a limit and actually reaching it in mathematical terms.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of limits in calculus
  • Familiarity with properties of polygons and circles
  • Basic knowledge of continuity and discontinuity in functions
  • Concept of differentiability in mathematical analysis
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the concept of limits in calculus, focusing on infinite limits
  • Study the properties of smooth curves and their differentiability
  • Investigate discontinuous functions and their implications in mathematics
  • Learn about the relationship between polygons and circles in geometric analysis
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of calculus, and anyone interested in the properties of geometric shapes and limits in mathematical functions.

cmos
Messages
366
Reaction score
1
The following is a problem that I’m sure is considered “basic” for mathematicians. I would therefore be gracious if somebody could, at the least, point me in the right direction to some reference. Since I’m not a mathematician, the simpler the better. :redface:

In short, my question is: what happens to the number of vertices of an n-sided polygon as n tends to infinity?

Let us consider a regular n-sided polygon. Obviously, the n-gon also has n vertices. The interior angle subtended at the n vertices increases as we increase n. As n tends to infinity, the interior angles each tend to 180°. In this same limit, the n-gon tends to a circle. On one hand, we now have an infinity of vertices. On the other hand, since the interior angle subtended at each vertex is infinitesimally 180°, we actually have no vertices. It thus appears that the number of vertices increases monotonically with n except at infinity where the number of vertices suddenly drops from infinity to zero.

Another way of seeing the above statement is that the circle (which is the limit of the n-gon as n tends to infinity), being a smooth curve, has no vertices.

Am I seeing the problem the right way? Any help would be much appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
cmos said:
On the other hand, since the interior angle subtended at each vertex is infinitesimally 180°, we actually have no vertices. It thus appears that the number of vertices increases monotonically with n except at infinity where the number of vertices suddenly drops from infinity to zero.
No. It has vertices equal to n approaching infinity.

cmos said:
Another way of seeing the above statement is that the circle (which is the limit of the n-gon as n tends to infinity), being a smooth curve, has no vertices.

Am I seeing the problem the right way? Any help would be much appreciated!
Well, that's the point of limits. You can get arbitrarily close to infinity but never reach it.

Thus, your circle has an arbitrarily large number vertices, that are arbitrarily shy of 180 degrees, but you never get infinite vertices or 180 degree angles.
 
You could define a vertex as a point where it's not smooth, ie. not differentiable. From that point of view, the circle has no vertices. But there's nothing strange about approximating a smooth thing with a non-smooth thing.

Number of vertices goes to infinity, it's infinity in the limit, but the function value doesn't equal the limit.

Mathematically, if you think of each figure as a point in a space, what you are seeing is that the "number of vertices" function has a discontinuity at the point that represents the circle. And there's nothing odd about having a discontinuous function. Happens all the time.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
9K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K