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
Since the straight diameter is easily measured with great accuracy, when
he had the area he could readily have found the circumference by working
backward the rule announced by Archimedes, viz.: that the area of a
circle is equal to that of a triangle whose base has the same length as
the circumference and whose altitude is equal to the radius.
One would almost fancy that amongst circle-squarers there prevails an
idea that some kind of ban or magical prohibition has been laid upon
this problem; that like the hidden treasures of the pirates of old it
is protected from the attacks of ordinary mortals by some spirit or
demoniac influence, which paralyses the mind of the would-be solver and
frustrates his efforts.
It is only on such an hypothesis that we can account for the wild
attempts of so many men, and the persistence with which they cling to
obviously erroneous results in the face not only of mathematical
demonstration, but of practical mechanical measurements. For even when
working in wood it is easy to measure to the half or even the one-fourth
of the hundredth of an inch, and on a ten-inch circle this will bring
the circumference to 3.1416 inches, which is a corroboration of the
orthodox ratio (3.14159) sufficient to show that any value which is
greater than 3.142 or less than 3.141 cannot possibly be correct.
And in regard to the area the proof is quite as simple. It is easy to
cut out of sheet metal a circle 10 inches in diameter, and a square of
7.85 on the side, or even one-thousandth of an inch closer to the
standard 7.854. Now if the work be done with anything like the accuracy
with which good machinists work, it will be found that the circle and
the square will exactly balance each other in weight, thus proving in
another way the correctness of the accepted ratio.
But although even as early as before the end of the eighteenth century,
the value of the ratio had been accurately determined to 152 places of
decimals, the nineteenth century abounded in circle-squarers who brought
forward the most absurd arguments in favor of other values. In 1836, a
French well-sinker named Lacomme, applied to a professor of mathematics
for information in regard to the amount of stone required to pave the
circular bottom of a well, and was told that it was impossible "to give
a correct answer, because the exact ratio of the diameter of a circle to
its circumference had never been determined"! This absolutely true but
very unpractical statement by the professor, set the well-sinker to
thinking; he studied mathematics after a fashion, and announced that he
had discovered that the circumference was exactly 3-1/8 times the length
of the diameter! For this discovery (?) he was honored by several medals
of the first class, bestowed by Parisian societies.
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