The Golden Ball & the Oxford Professors

  • Thread starter Thread starter eldrick
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ball Professors
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a mathematical problem involving two Oxford professors who dispute the division of a pure gold ball they obtained illicitly. One professor desires to carve a cylinder from the sphere, believing it will yield less than half the volume of the sphere, while the other calculates that the maximum volume of the cylinder is approximately 0.58 of the sphere's volume. The correct mass of the gold swarf left after carving the cylinder is determined to be 0.47 kg, based on calculus principles. Participants share their mathematical approaches and experiences with calculus, revealing a mix of self-taught and formal education backgrounds. The conversation highlights the intellectual engagement of the participants with the problem and their varied professional backgrounds.
eldrick
Messages
52
Reaction score
0
An excellent puzzle for you all - not overly hard, but a good tester :

We have a ball made of pure gold. 2 Oxford Professor had obtained it in illicit fashion during an archaeological dig in Peru. The 2 accomplices being born complexifiers, fell into a dispute about how they should divide up this valuable object.

One had a fancy to have a solid gold paperweight & as a ball is not much use for that purpose, decided that it must be a cylinder ; so he said,

" All I want is a cylinder from the ball & I can turn this up on the lathe in the laboratory. All the rest of it, the golden swarf, you shall have & you can sell it for a considerable sum. "

The 2nd Professor did some calculations & proved to his own satisfaction that any true cylinder from the sphere must contain less than half the volume of the sphere & so he agreed to the terms.

Was he wise ?

If the total weight of the of gold in the ball was 1 kg, what was the least weight of swarf his friend could make in turning a true cylinder from the golden ball ? "
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Is it 0.63kg?
 
topside said:
Is it 0.63kg?

nope

it's a high-school maths problem ( but probably last year of high school )
 
It's a high school maths problem for 14 year olds at most. It's a simple maths problem for people who've done maths to A-level equivalent.
 
matt grime said:
It's a high school maths problem for 14 year olds at most. It's a simple maths problem for people who've done maths to A-level equivalent.

it involves some calculus ( to get a non-calculator answer ) - they didn't teach me that as a 14y old ( only when i was 17y & doing my A -level )
 
volume(cylinder) / volume(sphere) = 3 / 4*SQRT(2) = 0.53

So the mass of the carved off part is 0.47kg

Although I solved it as a square in a circle problem and extended that answer to 3-D. I need to think more about if that's fully valid...

Happy Friday folks!


(EDIT -- I just did it for the sphere, and get the same term in the differentiation, so same answer.)
 
Last edited:
berkeman said:
volume(cylinder) / volume(sphere) = 3 / 4*SQRT(2) = 0.53

So the mass of the carved off part is 0.47kg

Although I solved it as a square in a circle problem and extended that answer to 3-D. I need to think more about if that's fully valid...

Happy Friday folks!


(EDIT -- I just did it for the sphere, and get the same term in the differentiation, so same answer.)

Something's wrong. I get max(\frac{V_{cyl}}{V_{sphere}}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} which approximates 0.58. Second part is 0.42.
 
Curious3141 said:
Something's wrong. I get max(\frac{V_{cyl}}{V_{sphere}}) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{3}} which approximates 0.58. Second part is 0.42.

correct !

can you give us the detailed workings - it's nice for the public record :smile:
 
eldrick said:
it involves some calculus ( to get a non-calculator answer ) - they didn't teach me that as a 14y old ( only when i was 17y & doing my A -level )

Really ? I self-learned Calc (up to basic Integral Calc, including Volumes of Revolution) "for fun" when I was 11 or so. School taught (bored) me with it again at 15-16 before O levels.
 
  • #10
eldrick said:
correct !

can you give us the detailed workings - it's nice for the public record :smile:
Yeah, what'd I do wrong, I wonder. Did you get

0 = d/dTheta ( sin(theta)cos(theta) ) ?
 
  • #11
eldrick said:
correct !

can you give us the detailed workings - it's nice for the public record :smile:

Taking a section thru the middle of the sphere/cylinder it's obvious that to have any hope of maximising the cylinder's volume, you'll need to inscribe it symmetrically into the sphere (touching the inside).

Then, in the cross-section, it just becomes a simple rectangle within a circle problem. Let the height of the cyl. be h Then the radius r of the cylinder is r = \sqrt{R^2 - \frac{h^2}{4}}

V_{cyl} = \pi r^2h = \pi(R^2 - \frac{h^2}{4})(h)

Differentiate that wrt h, set it to zero and solve for h, then find V_cyl, divide by 4/3*pi*R^3.
 
  • #12
berkeman said:
Yeah, what'd I do wrong, I wonder. Did you get

0 = d/dTheta ( sin(theta)cos(theta) ) ?

I did it trigonometrically as well, if you're using the same theta I'm using, there should be a square on the sine term.

More precisely, if \theta is the angle subtended between a vertical line drawn from the center of the cylinder and a line drawn from the center of the cylinder to the point where the limiting disk of the cylinder touches the circumscribing sphere, then

V_{cyl} = \pi R^2\sin^2\theta (2R\cos\theta) = 2\pi R^3\sin\theta \sin{2\theta}

max V_cyl when \tan{\theta} = \sqrt{2}
 
Last edited:
  • #13
Curious3141 said:
Really ? I self-learned Calc (up to basic Integral Calc, including Volumes of Revolution) "for fun" when I was 11 or so. School taught (bored) me with it again at 15-16 before O levels.

unfortunately for me, my library didn't stock maths primers then, i had to wait 'til i was 14y ole, won the local rotary club essay prize - tasted vol-a-vents for the 1st time, got a £15 book token - with which i bought my 1st maths book - boz & chaz

more unfortunately, i didn't get a chance to do a maths degree after - i ended up as a cardiologist :frown:
 
  • #14
Could someone post the detailed workings from a - z , in "code" form - nice for the record ! :approve:
 
Last edited:
  • #15
eldrick said:
unfortunately for me, my library didn't stock maths primers then, i had to wait 'til i was 14y ole, won the local rotary club essay prize - tasted vol-a-vents for the 1st time, got a £15 book token - with which i bought my 1st maths book - boz & chaz

more unfortunately, i didn't get a chance to do a maths degree after - i ended up as a cardiologist :frown:

You're a cardiologist ? I'm a Clinical Microbiologist ! Well, in training anyway. I've always felt I've missed my true calling by becoming a Physician.
 
  • #16
Curious3141 said:
You're a cardiologist ? I'm a Clinical Microbiologist ! Well, in training anyway. I've always felt I've missed my true calling by becoming a Physician.

I assume you mean you missed your true calling by not becoming a Physician , as a Microbiologist isn't considered as having missed their true calling if they pass their MBBS or MD & then specialise in Microbiology

A Clinical Microbiologist without a prior MBBS or MD , is not a Physician
 
  • #17
eldrick said:
I assume you mean you missed your true calling by not becoming a Physician , as a Microbiologist isn't considered as having missed their true calling if they pass their MBBS or MD & then specialise in Microbiology

A Clinical Microbiologist without a prior MBBS or MD , is not a Physician

I have an MBBS. I am a Clinical Pathologist.:rolleyes:

My greatest regret is not going to CalTech (I had admission and a scholarship). My parents wanted me to do Medicine locally.

I consider my true calling to be within the Physical Sciences, pure or applied. I regret doing Medicine, which I consider to be intellectually unstimulating and a waste of time. Pursuing a non-clinical, academically-oriented discipline as a postgraduate is a compromise, making the best of a bad deal.
 
Last edited:
  • #18
Curious3141 said:
I have an MBBS. I am a Clinical Pathologist.:rolleyes:

My greatest regret is not going to CalTech (I had admission and a scholarship). My parents wanted me to do Medicine locally.

I consider my true calling to be within the Physical Sciences, pure or applied. I regret doing Medicine, which I consider to be intellectually unstimulating and a waste of time. Pursuing a non-clinical, academically-oriented discipline as a postgraduate is a compromise, making the best of a bad deal.

More intriguing !?

MBBS is a "English" degree

They don't offer it to the Far East Guyz unless they study in England for at least 3y post-clinical...
 
  • #19
eldrick said:
More intriguing !?

MBBS is a "English" degree

They don't offer it to the Far East Guyz unless they study in England for at least 3y post-clinical...

Please educate yourself on what Medical Degrees most former British colonies offer in their Universities. Singapore is a former Brit colony, FYI.
 
  • #20
Ah, you wanted the exact amount cut off, rather than verifying that the professor in question was correct. I think there is a non-calculus method for doing it, but can't remember it. It's a famous problem, and certainly appears in the books of either Martin Gardner or David Wells.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
9
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
4K
Back
Top