Series of superimposed regular polygons

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the mathematical exploration of concentric regular polygons with equal area, specifically focusing on the fraction of area not occupied by successive polygons as the number of sides increases. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, geometric interpretations, and mathematical formulations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a formula for the radius of each n-gon based on its area and number of sides.
  • Another participant interprets the n-gon as composed of isosceles triangles and derives an expression for the area not occupied by the polygon within a circle.
  • Some participants clarify that the polygons must have the same area, leading to a decreasing sequence of radii for successive polygons.
  • There is a question about how the overlap of areas changes if a coaxial polygon is rotated relative to the previous one.
  • Concerns are raised about the complexity of the problem, especially when considering polygons with the same number of sides.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about the implications of rotation on the areas in question and emphasizes the need for maximal symmetry in the arrangement of the polygons.
  • Another participant reflects on the possibility of deriving a unique series or constant from the problem, suggesting it may be more of a geometric exercise than initially thought.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the need to consider polygons with equal area and the implications of their arrangement. However, there are multiple competing views regarding the effects of rotation and the interpretation of the area not covered by successive polygons, leaving the discussion unresolved.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on the definitions of area and symmetry, as well as unresolved mathematical steps related to the derivation of the proposed formulas.

Loren Booda
Messages
3,115
Reaction score
4
Superimpose concentric regular polygons of equal area with maximal symmetry, starting with the equilateral triangle and sequentually approaching the circumference of a circle. What series can you derive for the fraction of the area not occupied by any successive polygons?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay:
Now, clearly we can form a radius sequence for each n-gon, where the radius for each n-gon R_{n} is given by the formula:
R_{n}=\sqrt{\frac{2A}{n\sin(\frac{2\pi}{n})}}
This value is probably needed to solve your problem in some manner.
 
Assuming you mean a sequence of polygon inscribed in a circle of radius R, each n-gon can be interpreted as n isosceles triangle with congruent sides of length R and angle between them of 2\pi/n which can then be divided into two right angles with angle \pi/n. The base of each such triangle is 2R sin(\pi/n) and the height is R cos(\pi/n) so the area of each triangle is R^2 sin(\pi/n) cos(\pi/n) and the area of the entire n-gon is nR^2 sin(\pi/n) cos(\pi/n).

Since you are asking about the area inside the circle NOT in the polygon, that would be \pi R^2- nR^2 sin(\pi/n) cos(\pi/n) and the fraction of the area of the circle not occupied by the n-gon would be
\frac{\pi- n sin(\pi/n) cos(\pi/n)}{\pi}= 1-\frac{n}{\pi} sin(\pi/n)cos(\pi/n).<br /> It's easy to see that the last term of that goes to 1 in the limit and the "fraction of the area of the circlee not occupied by the n-gon", of course, goes to 0.<br /> <br /> I'm not sure what you mean by "fraction of the area not occupied by <b>successive polygons</b>".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I also thought that was Loren's question, HallsofIvy!
However, he explicitly states that we are talking of polygons having the SAME area, that is their vertices lie on different circles!
Note therefore that the sequence of radii is decreasing, if I'm not mistaken.
Thus, there will be area bits left that is not covered by subsequent polygons.
 
Sorry, by "a circle" I meant that a sequence of regular polygons of equal area and n sides, as n approaches infinity, approaches a circle of equal area.

arildno's formula, in an infinite series, might be used to determine my sequence - the fractional areas of regular polygons that are not included within successively sided, concentric, and bilaterally symmetric regular polygons of equal area.

I believe his second post captures the gist of what I am proposing.

HallsofIvy, would you repost your last formula?
 
Last edited:
arildno said:
I also thought that was Loren's question, HallsofIvy!
However, he explicitly states that we are talking of polygons having the SAME area, that is their vertices lie on different circles!
Note therefore that the sequence of radii is decreasing, if I'm not mistaken.
Thus, there will be area bits left that is not covered by subsequent polygons.
If a coaxial N+1 sided polygon is rotated with respect to the previous N sided regular polygon of the same area, would the amount of the N sided polygon that is not covered be changed?
 
Adding some, subtracting some..seems to become zero change..:blush:
 
arildno said:
Adding some, subtracting some..seems to become zero change..:blush:
I don't think it is simple, for instance what if they were both pentagons instead of polygons with a different number of sides?
 
I believe rotation would affect the areas in question - that's why I asked for maximal symmetry - e. g., all polygons each resting on a side.
 
  • #10
It was supposed to be
\frac{\pi- n sin(\pi/n) cos(\pi/n)}{\pi}= 1-\frac{n}{\pi} sin(\pi/n)cos(\pi/n).
 
  • #11
Loren Booda said:
I believe rotation would affect the areas in question - that's why I asked for maximal symmetry - e. g., all polygons each resting on a side.
You also said concentric polygons, so I take your posts to specify that each polygon has the same center axis and that a perpendicular bisector of the bottom side the n+1 polygon coincides with a perpendicular bisector of the bottom side of the previous n sided polygon, though the distance to the bottom side is shorter with each subsequent polygon.
Still I have difficulty coming up with a plot of the respective polygons in polar coordinates. Is it sufficient for your purpose to just add up the area of the N-sided polygons that lie outside the radius of a circle of the same area?
 
Last edited:
  • #12
I was trying to discern whether a unique series or fundamental constant could be derived from the problem at hand. It seems now that it is merely an exercize in excruciating geometry.:redface:

Some derivation of HallsofIvy's formula would probably do the trick, though. Thanks all for your patience.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
13K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K