CTK Exchange
CTK Wiki Math
Front Page
Movie shortcuts
Personal info
Awards
Terms of use
Privacy Policy

Interactive Activities

Cut The Knot!
MSET99 Talk
Games & Puzzles
Arithmetic/Algebra
Geometry
Probability
Eye Opener
Analog Gadgets
Inventor's Paradox
Did you know?...
Proofs
Math as Language
Things Impossible
My Logo
Math Poll
Other Math sit's
Guest book
News sit's

Recommend this site

Manifesto: what CTK is about Search CTK Buying a book is a commitment to learning Table of content Products to download and subscription Things you can find on CTK Chronology of updates Email to Cut The Knot Recommend this page

CTK Exchange

Subject: "Impossible to find circle center with only a straightedge?"     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy     Email this topic to a friend    
Conferences The CTK Exchange Thoughts and Suggestions Topic #80
Reading Topic #80
bennettjw
Member since Apr-8-10
Apr-08-10, 11:57 AM (EST)
Click to EMail bennettjw Click to send private message to bennettjw Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
"Impossible to find circle center with only a straightedge?"
 
   Two questions:

Exactly how is the given circle identified without identifying a center point or a point whose distance from the center point represents the circle radius? This makes little sense either theoretically or mechanically. At least, my compass can not do it. Maybe there needs to be a new postulate to Euclid's elements that every circle has a center point.

Does not the "transformation" of the circle (in three dimensions) represent a "redrawing" of the circle; and hence, breaks the rule of only using a straightedge? If not, then it implies a mechanical transformation, which invalidates the anti-proof.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
alexbadmin
Charter Member
2492 posts
Apr-08-10, 12:13 PM (EST)
Click to EMail alexb Click to send private message to alexb Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "RE: Impossible to find circle center with a straightedge?"
In response to message #0
 
   >Exactly how is the given circle identified without
>identifying a center point or a point whose distance from
>the center point represents the circle radius?

A circle may have been drawn using a stencil, or in the usual manner - by somebody else's anscetor - so long ago that the paper, like an old map, grew so decayed and fragile that while the lucky adventurer tried to smoothen it out on a table, the middle part caved in and disintegrated.

Have you seen a metaphorical interpretation of Bottema's theorem:

https://www.cut-the-knot.org/Curriculum/Geometry/Bottema.shtml

>This makes
>little sense either theoretically or mechanically.

Why, it did a lot of sense to several generations of geometers starting in the mid 1800s.

>At least, my compass can not do it.

It certainly takes imagination rather than brute force.

>Maybe there needs to be a
>new postulate to Euclid's elements that every circle has a
>center point.

By all means. You should write to somebody responsible for improving on Euclid's axioms.

>Does not the "transformation" of the circle (in three
>dimensions) represent a "redrawing" of the circle;

I do not know. It all might be in the mind's eye. How do you draw a circle in 3d?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
bennettjw
Member since Apr-8-10
Apr-12-10, 12:41 PM (EST)
Click to EMail bennettjw Click to send private message to bennettjw Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
2. "RE: Impossible to find circle center with a straightedge?"
In response to message #1
 
   > A circle may have been drawn using a stencil, or in the usual
> manner - by somebody else's anscetor - so long ago that the paper,
> like an old map, grew so decayed and fragile that while the lucky
> adventurer tried to smoothen it out on a table, the middle part
> caved in and disintegrated.

The explanation of stencil or ancestor still begs the question: How do you know it is a circle? Keep in mind that Geometry is not about the (mechanical) drawing; but rather, it is about the mathematically exact line(s) or circle(s) it represents (theory). We know that when we draw a circle or arc with a compass that we are representing a theoretically exact circle because we are representing every point on the circle edge is being equidistant from the circle center point.

Perhaps a better way to present the problem is "Is it possible to find the circle center point without using the circle center point and only using a straightedge."

My whole issue with this problem and its proof is that with only an existing circle and straightedge one can only draw random lines. One can say when a line intersects the circle, and one can draw more random lines through those circle intersection points, but one can do or say nothing else to include when the circle center has been found at some time in the infinite future. In short, drawing circles enable some ability to find direction. If drawing circles are removed from the set of tools, then not just this problem, but any Geometry problem is reduced to nothing of interest or value.

"Anybody find a circle center point around here? I seemed to have lost one."

> Why, it did a lot of sense to several generations of geometers
> starting in the mid 1800s.

Amateur geometers or Professional (w/ degree) Geometers? Recall that Wenzel discovered in 1837 an anti-proof that such problems as Angle Trisection could not be done, which heralded in a time of great interest in understanding Greek Philosophy and Mathematics by a lot of people, a vast number of who were amateurs. This might have been of great interest to amateurs, but I doubt this was of any interest to professionals.

> It certainly takes imagination rather than brute force.

Imagination without reason does nothing to .

> How do you draw a circle in 3d?

It requires identifying the plane that the circle lies in. Identifying a plane requires the following 3d conditions:
- Two intersecting lines,
- Two parallel lines that are each not the other,
- A line and a point not on the line,
- Three points that are each not the other,
- A circle, or
- Any combination of lines, points, or circles whose subset creates the above 3d conditions (e.g. two intersecting circles forming a line).

This last was actually a more interesting question than the topic problem.

I guess the larger issue is not the problem, but the acceptability of the proof that it can not be done. Let's try to form the frame of a more reasonable proof this way.

First, start by working only in the plane of the circle.
(1) Draw a line. This can be through:
- the circle:
- through a previous intersecting point formed by a previous
line, or
- through two previous intersecting points formed by two
previous lines, or
- through no previous intersecting points;
- not through the circle. (Only intersections with the circle can
possibly provide information regarding the circle center.)
(2) Does the line intersect the circle?
a) No, go back to step (1).
b) Yes, continue.
(3) Does the line intersect the circle center?
a) Since no information can be derived from the two intersecting
points of this line with the circle, then the answer is: Don't
know. Go back to step (1).

Second, does considering an additional dimension add any more information regarding the circle center regarding any line we can draw, intersecting or not? No. Done.


Attachments

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
alexbadmin
Charter Member
2492 posts
Apr-12-10, 12:52 PM (EST)
Click to EMail alexb Click to send private message to alexb Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
4. "RE: Impossible to find circle center with a straightedge?"
In response to message #2
 
   >The explanation of stencil or ancestor still begs the
>question: How do you know it is a circle?

Exactly same way that you know that a straight line can be darwn with a straightedge.

Keep in mind that
>Geometry is not about the (mechanical) drawing; but rather,
>it is about the mathematically exact line(s) or circle(s) it
>represents (theory).

Absolutely, I am sure you have imagined a straightedge. Now try imagining a curcular stencil.

>We know that when we draw a circle or
>arc with a compass that we are representing a theoretically
>exact circle because we are representing every point on the
>circle edge is being equidistant from the circle center
>point.

Yes, this is a common convention.

>Perhaps a better way to present the problem is "Is it
>possible to find the circle center point without using the
>circle center point and only using a straightedge."

Whatever does it for you.

>My whole issue with this problem and its proof is that with
>only an existing circle and straightedge one can only draw
>random lines.

This a sweeping claim. One may try drawing the lines purposefully, with a certain idea/goal in mind.

>> Why, it did a lot of sense to several generations of geometers
>> starting in the mid 1800s.
>
>Amateur geometers or Professional (w/ degree) Geometers?

Probably amateurs too but I know only about the professional geometers because of the literature they left.

>This might have been of great
>interest to amateurs, but I doubt this was of any interest
>to professionals.

If you look into 100 Great Problems of Elementary Mathematics by H. Dorrie, you'll see that #34 is call "Steiner's Straightedge Constructions". The theorem at hand is also Steiner's, I believe.

>> It certainly takes imagination rather than brute force.
>
>Imagination without reason does nothing to >best of Geometry (Hippocrates)].

What about the brute force?


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
bennettjw
Member since Apr-8-10
Apr-12-10, 12:41 PM (EST)
Click to EMail bennettjw Click to send private message to bennettjw Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "RE: Impossible to find circle center with a straightedge?"
In response to message #1
 
   >> Imagination without reason does nothing to .

Should read:

Imagination without reason does nothing to "preserve the best of Geometry (Hippocrates)".


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Forums | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic

You may be curious to have a look at the old CTK Exchange archive.
Please do not post there.

Copyright © 1996-2018 Alexander Bogomolny

Search:
Keywords:

Google
Web CTK