Why can't a circle be squared, but a lune can?

  • Thread starter Thread starter The Anomaly
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mathematical distinction between squaring a circle and squaring a lune, specifically the lune of Hippocrates. While a circle cannot be squared due to its area being linked to the transcendental number pi, the lune can be squared because its area is a rational number. The lune of Hippocrates is formed by intersecting two circles, resulting in a specific area that allows for squaring. This highlights the unique properties of circles compared to other curved shapes. Understanding these differences clarifies why certain curved shapes can be squared while circles cannot.
The Anomaly
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
I'm new to this forum, and I am very excited to be a member of this esteemed community. Anyway, I've been reading the Journey Through Genius, by William Dunham, and I am truly loving it. However, I had a question about a statement in the text, and I thought I'd ask if you guys could help me out with it.

I was reading about Hippocrates' proof that the lune is squarable, and the author said that despite hundreds of years of effort, the circle could not be squared. In other words, that there could not be made a square that has the same area as a circle. This was then proved in the nineteenth century by Ferdinand Lindemann.

Anyway, I understand both Hippocrates proof, and Lindemann's proof, and I believe I fully understand why it'd be impossible to make a square that is the same area as a circle. It makes sense--I mean, pi is transcendental and all, and as such it can not be drawn. However, what I don't understand is why we can still square a curved shape such as a lune. Would not a lune simply be a section of a circle? I mean, doesn't it have that same curve that a circle has--just that it is not a perfect circle?

Basically, what makes a circle so intrinsically special that it can not be squared, while other curved ones can be? Is it simply because their areas are not linked to a transcendental number like the circle is?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What is special about a circle is just what you said above: its area depends on the constant \pi[/tex] which is transcendental. It is NOT true that a lune can alwats be squared. What is true is that a certain lune, the <b>lune of Hipocrates</b>, which is formed by intersecting a circle of Radius R with a circle of radius \sqrt{R/2} passing through points on the first circle a quarter circle apart (see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lune_of_Hippocrates" target="_blank" class="link link--external" rel="nofollow ugc noopener">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lune_of_Hippocrates</a>), has area (1/2)R<sup>2</sup>, a rational number, and so is &quot;squarable&quot;.
 
HallsofIvy said:
What is special about a circle is just what you said above: its area depends on the constant \pi[/tex] which is transcendental. It is NOT true that a lune can alwats be squared. What is true is that a certain lune, the <b>lune of Hipocrates</b>, which is formed by intersecting a circle of Radius R with a circle of radius \sqrt{R/2} passing through points on the first circle a quarter circle apart (see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lune_of_Hippocrates" target="_blank" class="link link--external" rel="nofollow ugc noopener">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lune_of_Hippocrates</a>), has area (1/2)R<sup>2</sup>, a rational number, and so is &quot;squarable&quot;.
<br /> <br /> Alright, thanks for the answer. That&#039;s just what I wanted to know.
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Back
Top