A Another great mathematical problem: Quadrisection of a disc

  • A
  • Thread starter Thread starter Anixx
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Geometric
AI Thread Summary
The quadrisection of a disc involves dividing a disc into four equal-area parts using three chords from a single boundary point, one being a diameter. This problem is deemed impossible to solve with just a straightedge and compass due to the complexity of the equation involved, specifically the relationship between the angle α and the sine function. The equation requires solving for α in a manner that does not yield a Galois extension of degree 2^n, indicating its unsolvability with traditional methods. The discussion also explores the potential for using additional tools, such as the Dottie number, which could change the solvability of the problem. Overall, the quadrisection of a disc remains a challenging mathematical conundrum.
Anixx
Messages
88
Reaction score
11
Along with the problem of squaring a circle and trisection of an angle, there is one more great problem: quarisection of a disc.

You have a disk and have to dissect it into four parts of equal area with three chords coming from the same point on the disc's boundary (one of these chords is a diameter).

What makes this problem impossible to solve with straightedge and compass?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
"quadrisection", for those of us who have to Google the problem. :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes topsquark and weirdoguy
Try Gptchat.
 
  • Haha
Likes DaveC426913
Anixx said:
Along with the problem of squaring a circle and trisection of an angle, there is one more great problem: quarisection of a disc.

You have a disk and have to dissect it into four parts of equal area with three chords coming from the same point on the disc's boundary (one of these chords is a diameter).

What makes this problem impossible to solve with straightedge and compass?
In order to do this, you have to solve
1689717515785.png

$$
A= \dfrac{ \pi r^2}{4}= \dfrac{r^2}{2}(\alpha -\sin(\alpha)) \Longleftrightarrow \dfrac{\pi}{2}=\alpha -\sin(\alpha)
$$
which is something like ##\alpha \approx 2.31## and this number is nowhere even near a Galois extension of degree ##2^n.##
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes dextercioby, Anixx and berkeman
fresh_42 said:
In order to do this, you have to solve
View attachment 329405
$$
A= \dfrac{ \pi r^2}{4}= \dfrac{r^2}{2}(\alpha -\sin(\alpha)) \Longleftrightarrow \dfrac{\pi}{2}=\alpha -\sin(\alpha)
$$
which is something like ##\alpha \approx 2.31## and this number is nowhere even near a Galois extension of degree ##2^n.##
If we have a straightangle, compass and an angle of Dottie number available, can we divide a disk into arbitrary number of parts of equal area with chords?

What if we have only interval of Dottie number and no angle?
 
Things become completely different if additional tools can be used. IIRC then trisection becomes solvable with the help of an Archimedean spiral.

I don't know anything about the problem here with any auxiliary weapons. However, solving the equation for ##\alpha## looks rather difficult, even with additional tools. ##\alpha - \sin(\alpha)## is very inconvenient.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes dextercioby
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top