The Seven Follies of Science [2nd ed.]: A popular account of the most famous scientific impossibilities and the attempts which have been made to solve them. To which is added a small budget of interesting paradoxes, illusions, and marvelsPhin, John
History
The Seven Follies of Science [2nd ed.]: A popular account of the most famous scientific impossibilities and the attempts which have been made to solve them. To which is added a small budget of interesting paradoxes, illusions, and marvels
Phin, John
Geometry -- Famous problems; Scientific recreations
There are various mechanical methods of measuring and comparing the
diameter and the circumference of a circle, and some of them give
tolerably accurate results. The most obvious device and that which was
probably the oldest, is the use of a cord or ribbon for the curved
surface and the usual measuring rule for the diameter. With an
accurately divided rule and a thin metallic ribbon which does not
stretch, it is possible to determine the ratio to the second fractional
place, and with a little care and skill the third place may be
determined quite closely.
An improvement which was no doubt introduced at a very early day is the
measuring wheel or circumferentor. This is used extensively at the
present day by country wheelwrights for measuring tires. It consists of
a wheel fixed in a frame so that it may be rolled along or over any
surface of which the measurement is desired.
This may of course be used for measuring the circumference of any circle
and comparing it with the diameter. De Morgan gives the following
instance of its use: A squarer, having read that the circular ratio was
undetermined, advertised in a country paper as follows: "I thought it
very strange that so many great scholars in all ages should have failed
in finding the true ratio and have been determined to try myself." He
kept his method secret, expecting "to secure the benefit of the
discovery," but it leaked out that he did it by rolling a twelve-inch
disk along a straight rail, and his ratio was 64 to 201 or 3.140625
exactly. As De Morgan says, this is a very creditable piece of work; it
is not wrong by 1 in 3000.
Skilful machinists are able to measure to the one-five-thousandth of an
inch; this, on a two-inch cylinder, would give the ratio correct to five
places, provided we could measure the curved line as accurately as we
can the straight diameter, but it is difficult to do this by the usual
methods. Perhaps the most accurate plan would be to use a fine wire and
wrap it round the cylinder a number of times, after which its length
could be measured. The result would of course require correction for the
angle which the wire would necessarily make if the ends did not meet
squarely and also for the diameter of the wire. Very accurate results
have been obtained by this method in measuring the diameters of small
rods.
A somewhat original way of finding the area of a circle was adopted by
one squarer. He took a carefully turned metal cylinder and having
measured its length with great accuracy he adopted the Archimedean
method of finding its cubical contents, that is to say, he immersed it
in water and found out how much it displaced. He then had all the data
required to enable him to calculate the area of the circle upon which
the cylinder stood.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account