Understanding why πr^2 works for different area calculations

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter paulb203
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Area Circle Radius
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around understanding the formula for the area of geometric shapes, particularly exploring the relationship between the area of a circle (πr²) and the area of other shapes like squares and hexagons. Participants are examining how the concept of a 'diameter' and a corresponding ratio can be applied to different polygons to derive area formulas.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a new ratio, termed 'sqi', for squares, suggesting it helps understand the area calculation analogous to π for circles.
  • Another participant encourages testing the proposed method on other shapes like hexagons and octagons to see how the ratio changes with the number of sides.
  • A participant notes that the reasoning might not hold for rectangles or ellipses, indicating a potential limitation in the approach.
  • There is a discussion about the definition of 'diameter' for a hexagon, with one participant suggesting it should be the distance from one corner to the opposite corner.
  • Another participant points out inconsistencies in using different definitions of 'diameter' and suggests a consistent method for calculating it.
  • One participant shares their calculations for the area of a hexagon using two different formulas, leading to different values for the derived ratio 'hxi'.
  • There is confusion expressed about the differing results obtained from the area calculations, highlighting the complexity of the topic.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the best method for defining 'diameter' or the validity of the proposed ratios for different shapes. Multiple competing views and methods remain, with ongoing exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty regarding the definitions and calculations involved, particularly with the application of ratios to different geometric shapes. There are unresolved questions about the validity of the proposed methods and the consistency of definitions used.

paulb203
Messages
196
Reaction score
76
TL;DR
A kind of personal 'proof' to help me grasp πr^2
I know there are videos etc explaining why but I thought I would try to find a way to understand this myself.

Imagine a version of πr^2, but instead of being for the area of a circle, it’s for the area of a square.
Call it sqi ar ^2
sqi = the ratio of the ‘diameter’ of the square to the square’s ‘circumference’ (the ‘diameter’ of the square being a vertical or horizontal line through the square’s centre, and the ‘circumference’ being its perimeter).
So, sqi=4 (like π=3.14...)
ar = the ‘radius’ of the square (half it’s ‘diameter’, just like with a circe and it’s radius)

Now take a square 4 cm by 4cm
And apply sqi ar ^2
Which gives us 4x2^2
Which = 16cm^2
Which matches with the 16cm^2 we would get from the conventional way of finding the area of the square.

This helps make sense of πr^2, for me at least
Any thoughts?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
That is a start in the understanding. Of course, one example does not make a proof. Try some other examples, such as regular hexagon, octagon, etc.

See how the ratio changes as the limit of number of sides increases.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: paulb203 and jim mcnamara
The coincidence you are wondering about may be due to the similarity of the figure in the X and Y axis. If you consider the area of a rectangle or an ellipse, the pattern is broken.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: paulb203
Your proof has determined that the value of the perimeter/diameter ratio (aka π for circumferences) for a square (which "radius" has been defined by you) is 4.

Please, see:
https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/circle.html

https://www.mathsisfun.com/geometry/circle-area-lines.html

circle-area-lines.svg



circle-area-vs-square.svg


Area circle-square.jpg
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: paulb203
scottdave said:
That is a start in the understanding. Of course, one example does not make a proof. Try some other examples, such as regular hexagon, octagon, etc.

See how the ratio changes as the limit of number of sides increases.
Thanks, Dave.

First challenge, for me; draw a regular hexagon. I had to dig out my protractor, and think about how to go about that. Got there in the end.
Drew a regular hexagon, sides 6cm.
Wondered what would count as the 'diameter'. Thinking corner to furthest away corner, so 12cm (that was interesting; twice the length of the sides).
Then realised I'd never considered what the area of a hexagon might be, what the formula for that might be. Found 2 online. 3√3/(2)(a^2) where a=side
This gave the area as approx 93.53
And,
A=0.5ap where a=apothem and p=perimeter
Once I'd Googled 'apothem' I applied the formula and got 90, which sounded right as I had approximated the apothem as 5

So now to apply a version of sqi ar ^2
Call it hxi ar ^2
hxi being the ratio of the perimeter of the hexagon (36 in this case) to the 'diameter' of the hexagon (12 in this case, if I'm correct in thinking that corner to furthest corner counts as the 'diameter'?).
And 36:12 = 3:1
So hxi ( 'pi for a hexagon' )= 3?

I'm knackered after that :)
 
paulb203 said:
the ‘diameter’ of the square being a vertical or horizontal line through the square’s centre,
paulb203 said:
if I'm correct in thinking that corner to furthest corner counts as the 'diameter'?).
You are being inconsistent here. You should either use the side midpoints or the corners. One method approaches pi from above, the other from below, as you increase the number of sides.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: scottdave, SammyS and paulb203
A.T. said:
You are being inconsistent here. You should either use the side midpoints or the corners. One method approaches pi from above, the other from below, as you increase the number of sides.
Thanks, A.T.
I'll use the side midpoints as that's what made sense for me with a square.
And now I've found out that is the apothem I can dispense with calling it 'ar' and call it 'a' for apothem instead
But I've got two different answers.
Using [3√3/(2)](a^2) for the area (where a=length of side) which gives 93.5 I get 3.09 for 'hxi'
hxi(a^2)=93.5 (a=apothem) (apothem = 5.5)
hxi=93.5/5.5^2
hxi=3.09

And, using Area=0.5aP where a=apothem and P=perimeter I get 99 for the area (?I?!)
Which gives me;
hxi(a^2)=99
hxi=99/5.5^2
hxi=3.27 (the 27 recurring)

?I?!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
9K
Replies
28
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K