The Squaring of The Circle: Solved

The Squaring of The Circle: Solved

Posted in the Mathematics Forum

Don Barone

Windsor, Canada

#1 Jan 8, 2008
Hi all.

I have managed to square the circle in both perimeter and area by having the insight to step not only out of the box but climb a mountain beside said box. It is as simple as 1, 2 square root of 5 and I was wondering what would be the best venue for posting said solution. And trust me I know that "they" said it is impossible. Guess what folks ... "They" were in error.

Best Regards
Don Barone
Arno van Asseldonk

Molenhoek, Netherlands

#2 Jan 9, 2008
If it were possible to square the circle this would mean that it is possible to construct a line segment with length pi. Since pi is transcendental, and a line segment with a given length is only constructible if this length happens to be an algebraic number, this means that it is not possible to square the circle.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#3 Jan 10, 2008
Arno van Asseldonk wrote:
If it were possible to square the circle this would mean that it is possible to construct a line segment with length pi. Since pi is transcendental, and a line segment with a given length is only constructible if this length happens to be an algebraic number, this means that it is not possible to square the circle.
True. The proof that it is impossible to solve the classical problem of squaring the circle has been around for quite some time.

But people still try.
Don Barone

Windsor, Canada

#4 Jan 10, 2008
Hi all.

Well if this is true as you say ... then I contend that the circle is an imaginary figure and does not exist anywhere but in our minds.

As proof of this I challenge anyone to show me a perfect circle occuring in nature

Best
Don Barone

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#5 Jan 11, 2008
Don Barone wrote:
Hi all.
Well if this is true as you say ... then I contend that the circle is an imaginary figure and does not exist anywhere but in our minds.
As proof of this I challenge anyone to show me a perfect circle occuring in nature
Best
Don Barone
When you get right down to it, Don, Mathematics has nothing to do with nature. Mathematics is abstract.
Don Barone

Windsor, Canada

#6 Jan 11, 2008
Hi Darwin's Stepchild

Perhaps but Phi sure seems to work rather well for nature. No trouble showing Phi in nature is there ? Therefore I disagree with you that mathematics is simply abstract. There are two main ratios we think of and use in everyday thought. Phi and Pi and only Phi is real.

The circle can not be squared because in reality there is no such thing as a circle. It then follows that since we will eventually come to the smallest possible chord that space IS NOT divisible forever either.

What is the smallest distance ? Well I kind of like 1 to the minus 50 (or 55) with 1 being equal to a Royal Cubit

Best
Don Barone
mitROB

Lake Hopatcong, NJ

#7 Feb 5, 2008
DON:

ConGrats!! Suggest you write it up and place it in your mattress. That way your name will not be associated with the notion that a circle can be squared.
Don Barone wrote:
Hi all.
I have managed to square the circle in both perimeter and area by having the insight to step not only out of the box but climb a mountain beside said box. It is as simple as 1, 2 square root of 5 and I was wondering what would be the best venue for posting said solution. And trust me I know that "they" said it is impossible. Guess what folks ... "They" were in error.
Best Regards
Don Barone
Clive Milne

Adelaide, Australia

#8 Apr 25, 2008
Hi Don,
I would love to see this proof, can understand if you don't share it before it is published though.
Am guessing you defined the relationship of phi and went from there?
btw) I have a stunning image for you in relation to Phi. The implications will absolutely nail you to the spot.
email me at milnecd(at) yahoo.com
Bill

Canada

#9 Apr 26, 2008
Darwins Stepchild wrote:
<quoted text>
When you get right down to it, Don, Mathematics has nothing to do with nature. Mathematics is abstract.
Mathematics has everything to do with nature, and vice versa. Math describes relationships and defines limits. Human thought is abstract, so human mathematicians create mathematical abstractions, but the realtionships and limits described by mathematics are the nature of the physical world. When you study mathematics you are learning something about the nature of reality. You're not just learning to manipulate a game created by mathematicians.
Ancient scholars were so focused on geometry as an abstraction that they thought it was separate from physical reality. That idea is still popular, but I don't buy it.
Andy Livingstone

Coventry, UK

#10 Aug 10, 2009
Squaring the circle,the non compatability of cosmic theory and quantum mechanics has anybody thought that fundimentals of maths is wrong?
The Faithful Witness

South Africa

#11 Sep 15, 2009
Andy Livingstone wrote:
Squaring the circle,the non compatability of cosmic theory and quantum mechanics has anybody thought that fundimentals of maths is wrong?
True the foundation of mathematics is flawed.



Also see: http://marques.co.za/duke/square.htm
http://marques.co.za/duke/irratio.htm

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#12 Sep 17, 2009
Andy Livingstone wrote:
Squaring the circle,the non compatability of cosmic theory and quantum mechanics has anybody thought that fundimentals of maths is wrong?
Godel's Incompleteness Theorems state that given any set of axioms powerful enough to model mathematics, it is impossible to prove the consistency of that set of axioms.

So there is a chance that the axioms of set theory ARE inconsistent and all of math is built upon sand. However, given that in 150 years no contradiction has arisen from using set theory, the chances of there being an inconsistency is very, very small.

“Turning coffee into theorems”

Since: Dec 06

Trapped inside a Klein Bottle

#13 Sep 17, 2009
Bill wrote:
<quoted text>
Mathematics has everything to do with nature, and vice versa. Math describes relationships and defines limits. Human thought is abstract, so human mathematicians create mathematical abstractions, but the realtionships and limits described by mathematics are the nature of the physical world. When you study mathematics you are learning something about the nature of reality. You're not just learning to manipulate a game created by mathematicians.
Ancient scholars were so focused on geometry as an abstraction that they thought it was separate from physical reality. That idea is still popular, but I don't buy it.
Show me a physical representation of the square root of -1.

Math is a useful tool for describing nature, but there is a great deal of math that has little to nothing to do with the real world.
Mona Lisa Overdr1v3

United States

#15 Jan 3, 2010
"Squaring the Circle" - Was at one point in time considered the impossible task of demonstrating the abstract correlation between a circle and a square using a compass and a "straight edge," to derive a constant ratio of line lengths demonstrating the concept of "phi" aka "the golden ratio" between various length line segments A, B, C, or the ratio of the length of the entire line (A)to the length of larger line segment (B), which is the same as the ratio of the length of the larger line segment (B)to the length of the smaller line segment (C). This happens only at the point where:

A is 1.618 ... times B and B is 1.618 ... times C.
Alternatively, C is 0.618... of B and B is .618... of A.

Supposedly at one point in history a carpenter demonstrated this task, using a compass and a straight edge to create a point, a ray, a line segment, an arc, a tangent, a triangle, circumscribe a square within a triangle.... etc.
The Faithful Witness

South Africa

#16 Jan 11, 2010
How to construct the divine proportion.

Gamelux

Mendoza, Argentina

#17 Oct 23, 2012
Don Barone wrote:
Hi all.
I have managed to square the circle in both perimeter and area by having the insight to step not only out of the box but climb a mountain beside said box. It is as simple as 1, 2 square root of 5 and I was wondering what would be the best venue for posting said solution. And trust me I know that "they" said it is impossible. Guess what folks ... "They" were in error.
Best Regards
Don Barone
Hi Don, I have been trying to do this same thing for a while now, and would be honored to read your proof. Please, would you be so kind to send it to me: [email protected]
Rod

Irving, TX

#18 Apr 23, 2013
A new geometry design offering conceptual proof that only 3 points are required to "square the circle". When the green scalene triangle is created, the horizontal line equates to the square root of Pi:
http://aitnaru.org/threepoints.html

(large circle's diameter = 2000000 units)

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Mathematics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Sue Lani Madsen: Time to discard outdated stere... Nov '17 humanspirit 3
News Opinion: Trump immigrant rhetoric relies on sta... Nov '17 freebird 3
News One million people identify as LGB in 'young an... Oct '17 Marcus 16
News Halton Catholic student EQAO results down over ... Sep '17 where is schools AC 1
News Halton public board students still achieving ab... Sep '17 Bateman school cl... 1
News Long-form census is a valuable tool (Sep '10) Aug '17 GTA look in 6
News Schools throughout the country are grappling wi... Aug '17 Solarman 1
More from around the web