Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Semi-circles and right angle dilemmas . . .

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Daily Mail reports on a class assignment for seven year olds that happened to be set for the daughter of a Mathematics Lecturer at Oxford.

Maths lecturer is left baffled by his seven-year-old daughter’s geometry homework and turns to Twitter for help – so can YOU work out if it’s true or false?

Dr Kit Yates shares his seven-year-old daughter’s maths homework to Twitter

The question asked students whether a semi-circle had ‘two right angles’ or not

The maths lecturer, from Oxford, admitted that he was stumped by the problem 

People were left baffled by the question and came up with conflicting answers 

By Kate Dennett For Mailonline

Published: 17:40 GMT, 25 February 2021 | Updated: 17:40 GMT, 25 February 2021

Here is the question and the “expected” seven year old School Math answer:

Why would a PhD level Maths Lecturer disagree? Indeed, why would he suggest — and this is where it gets interesting for us here at UD — “there was a strong case for claiming that the answer was ‘true’ as well as ‘false’“?

Sounds familiar?

Obviously, a Math Lecturer — I switch to the American style abbreviation — will be familiar with the world of the infinitesimal. So, he would be aware that at the point of intersection of diameter and circumference, there is a required right angle to the tangent and that at that point curve and tangent coincide . . . the tangent and the curve share the same slope at that point, but not at any identifiable real value on the circumference beyond — thus, distinct from — that point.

Arguably, for an infinitesimal spread about the point where the tangent touches the curve and the diameter cuts it, we have a straight line segment c_0 +/- dc in the circumference but at right angles to the diameter. That is, the hyperreals are peeking in and giving us a language to constructively talk about structures and quantities.

Let’s cross check, through Wikipedia:

In geometry, a polygon (/ˈpɒlɪɡɒn/) is a plane figure that is described by a finite number of straight line segments connected to form a closed polygonal chain or polygonal circuit. The solid plane region, the bounding circuit, or the two together, may be called a polygon.

The segments of a polygonal circuit are called its edges or sides, and the points where two edges meet are the polygon’s vertices (singular: vertex) or corners. The interior of a solid polygon is sometimes called its body. An n-gon is a polygon with n sides; for example, a triangle is a 3-gon.

Notice, the requirement, “finite number of straight line segments”? Other common sources will omit finiteness, and it is commonly recognised that a circle is a beyond finite case of a regular n-gon. So, we have reasonable grounds for referring to infinitesimal line segments and removing the finitude. For example, that is one way to approach the question, what is the area of a circle.

I should note that an infinitesimal value can be seen as a number say h near to 0 in the number line, closer to 0 than any 1/n, where n is a finite counting number. (This opens up also the concept of transfinite hyperreals. That is h = 1/H, a number such that H > n for any finite counting number.)

Shifting to Coordinate Geometry, let’s put our circle at the origin, O, and give it radius r:

With these ideas in hand, we can see that by using infinitesimals, a circle is a limiting case of a regular polygon, but the length of sides is too short to be captured by any distinct point on the circumference c_1 at (x1,y1) distinctly removed from C_0, at (x0,y0) such that x1 – x0 is a real value, and the same for y1 – y0. (That is, we here mark a distinction between the infinitesimally altered x0 + dx or the similarly altered y0 + dy and any neighbouring x1 and y1, constrained to be strictly real.)

This allows us to seemingly have our cake and eat it.

That is, no distinctly removed point c1 with strictly real coordinates different from c0 will lie on the tangent to the circle at c0 at the point where the diameter cuts the circle. But at the same time we can speak reasonably of points along a short line segment at c0, that is straight but in the circumference, as the points in question c0 + dc, are infinitesimally removed from c0. Where, dc^2 = dx^2 + dy^2.

That is, further, we are looking at an infinitesimal right angle triangle with the hypoteneuse dc being on the tangent line for the circle at c0.

If we can swallow this camel, then we have an answer, yes there is a right angle at the intersections of diameter with circumference, and yes the circle is bounded by a closed curve where any distinct c_1 at (x1,y1) that is such that x1 and y1 are strictly real, will fall away from the tangent at c_0.

Is such reasonable?

Well, let us see how we arrived at the differential coefficient dy/dx, as an expression of the slope of y = f(x) at some point on a curved line, through the slope of the tangent-limit to the slopes of the secants:

Here, we see how the slopes of secants, in the limit, become the slope of the tangent at M, as h tends to 0, i.e. becomes an infinitesimal.

Now, let us ponder the curvature of a continuous, differentiable line:

Here, curvature K = 1/R, R the radius of curvature. Observe that the tangent line is perpendicular to the curve and its osculating circle, which near P is coincident with the curve. All of this begs for interpretation on infinitesimals. BTW, for a straight line, the radius of curvature is infinite, yielding a curvature of 0.

With these in mind, we can see that no, this is not a superposition of two contradictory states but a case that is surprisingly relevant, regarding the value of the infinitesimal perspective.

Now, where does this all lead? Interesting places . . . END

Comments
JVL, kindly see the just above. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
08:39 AM
8
08
39
AM
PDT
VL, yes, imperfect curriculum, and yes the Calculus, is the key answer. Yes, telling a misleading answer to the young is problematic. The next bit is, there is a reasonable sense that there is a slope of a curved line, tied to the slope of its tangent. at any point a rubber bung on a string is moving along the tangent and sees a centripetal acceleration that leads to change of direction; rubber bungs are safer than rocks and my favourite demo was bung on string through a pen barrel with a card flag then a weight the other end, thanks to Nuffield. For the actual release, use just a bung on a string, I favoured crochet thread. (Long story there.) Yes, Further to this, the shift in slope at the corners gives an angle as the ant metaphor will show and yes just at the curve it will be a 90 degree angle. This in turn ties to calculus, limits, infinitesimals [duly tamed] and eliminates the perceived contradiction. This brings in how naturally R* is involved in real world situations, even with old fashioned Geometry. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
08:31 AM
8
08
31
AM
PDT
SA2, yes the developers should have given such, even a dot to indicate centre. They didn't, and even though from familiarity it is effectively a semicircle (that should have shown intent) the question was asked. I answered it using an old physics data analysis technique: Graph Paper is an instrument. As for walking around with a mirror, those of us who keep a Swiss Army Knife in the pocket do in fact have something close, it will require a little tilting by eye. It happens that a Kitchen knife has a better mirror as it is wider in the blade and pretty flat near the back. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
08:22 AM
8
08
22
AM
PDT
Viola Lee: At the endpoints of the semi-circle y = 0, so the tangent is a vertical line. Yup, the slope is undefined but approaches + or - infinity depending on which side we're talking about and which side you approach from. Like we said: all undergraduate calculus stuff. Easy peasy. Tangents to a circle are ALWAYS perpendicular to the radius at the same point. But the circle or semi-circle is NOT the tangent. The shape, as shown, has no right angles. Time for another topic folks.JVL
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
08:22 AM
8
08
22
AM
PDT
My comment in 42 was about the more general notion of the direction a point is moving on a curve. The equation of the semicircle shown (assuming the diameter is on the x-axis, centered at zero) is y =-sqr(r^2 - x^2), and the derivative is y' = -x/y. At the endpoints of the semi-circle y = 0, so the tangent is a vertical line.Viola Lee
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:50 AM
7
07
50
AM
PDT
Viola Lee: If the curve is represented by a function (as a circle is) The top half anyway. Unless we're doing implicit stuff . . .JVL
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:41 AM
7
07
41
AM
PDT
And, once again Steve, you are right. I wish we knew more about the context in which this problem occurred. I can't imagine what surrounding curriculum made the question appropriate for a seven year old. One of the pictures in the OP says, "There is a difference between the correct answer and the answer at this learning stage." That's poor pedagogy, in my opinion. (Feynman has a good quote about not doing that with students someplace, but I don't know where.)Viola Lee
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:38 AM
7
07
38
AM
PDT
Kairosfocus “ The mirror technique is quite accurate enough to demonstrate intent:” Not all of us carry mirrors around with us. Wouldn’t be much simpler for the teacher to have stated that the shape was a semicircle? My point is simply that it is impossible to answer the question (true or false) with the information provided.Steve Alten2
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:30 AM
7
07
30
AM
PDT
Here's a real-world example to illustrate the point the WJM brings up. Imagine swinging a rock on a string. Let go of the string. (Don't do this at home - it's dangerous!) The rock flies off, as we say, at a tangent. If we turn this into a pure math problem, and imagine a point moving around a circle, at any point the point is moving in a particular direction, even though at the "next point" it is moving in a different direction. The direction (angle) it is moving is that which is perpendicular to the radius at that point. That is, the direction of a curve at any point is the direction of the tangent line at that point, and thus any measurement of angles related to the point are in reference to the tangent line. If the curve is represented by a function (as a circle is), then the value of the derivative of the function at that point is the slope of the tangent line. The derivative also represent the rate of change of the function, and is immensely important in both theoretical and practical calculus.Viola Lee
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:30 AM
7
07
30
AM
PDT
William J Murray: However, if you think about the problem in the abstract, the answer is easy. I agree, using limits the problem is easy. Viola Lee knows. But, the point is that it wasn't meant to be a caculus-level problem. I've seen similar things on state-level exams in the UK.JVL
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:15 AM
7
07
15
AM
PDT
WJM, at 4 I wrote,
The standard definition of the angle between two curves at their point of intersection is the angle formed by their tangents at that point. The Greeks proved long ago that a radius is perpendicular to the tangent at their point of intersection. Therefore, the circle makes a right angle at the endpoints of the diameter.
Calculus solved the theoretical point you are bringing up quite a few centuries ago. Now the practical issue is a bit different. As I discussed above, it is bad practice to not include important given info in a geometry problem, although we all assume the figure is a semicircle. Also, I went to the website and looked at some of their curriculum materials. In my opinion, they are not very good. The problem in question is not a good question for the public-school age students these materials are designed for.Viola Lee
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
07:01 AM
7
07
01
AM
PDT
WJM, the world is an experience not an assumption.I will address the issue in the other thread. The points I am making here lie at the root of calculus. The reality is, our ant pivots to follow the curve C, having arrived at the intersection by travelling along D. That pivot is through an angle. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
06:28 AM
6
06
28
AM
PDT
BTW, Zeno's paradoxes only exist if one posits an actual, external world exists. Under MRT, motion, velocity and "space" do not actually exist except as mental experiences - which accounts for the basic answer, "Zeno must be wrong because we actually experience these things." Zeno would only "have to be wrong" if we were talking about an actual, physical external world. The reason we can actually overtake the slower runner, or arrive at a destination, has nothing - ultimately - to do with "decreasing distances" or "motion through space." This is why getting the fundamental question about the actual nature of our existence is kinda important; if you don't get that right, you might wind up with these kinds of paradoxes.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
06:02 AM
6
06
02
AM
PDT
So: it is literally impossible, utilizing the intersection point and one next to it on a circle, to acquire a true 90 degree angle from the dissecting line, even if that "next point" is at Planck length distance.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
05:41 AM
5
05
41
AM
PDT
KF, If any two succeeding point on a circle are perfectly straight, it's not a circle. It may look that way to the observer of any physical reprsentation; it may feel like it in a physical situation, the circle may be so large it looks like you are turning a right-angle corner between straight, perpendicular roads or hallways. None of that matters; that's mistaking a conceptual problem for a physical one. A curved line cannot intersect with a straight line and produce any angle because angles are made by two intersecting straight lines. You can pick two points of a circle (the one at the point of intersection and one immediately after that in either direction) and us that as your two-point "straight line" reference, but then you are not using the curved line to measure your angle, you're substituting a straight line, mapped by selecting two points on the circle, for the actual line, which is curved. In any event, using the point of intersection and one "next to" the point of intersection to map out your straight line substitute cannot produce an actual right angle, even if it is 89.9999999999999.... degrees.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
05:34 AM
5
05
34
AM
PDT
WJM, there is a succession of points in any line, a continuum in fact. Where, as the ant turning to follow the circumference shows, there is an angle involved in a corner [which is a relationship of lines thus of points involved], a vertex of sorts. By going to infinitesimals and/or limits, we can make sense out of that. Similar to, at a certain time and place a car is moving at the rate, 30 miles per hour. Then ponder, doing that around a bend. That shift to a new understanding was the effective answer to Zeno's paradoxes and the like. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
05:24 AM
5
05
24
AM
PDT
KF @32, You're talking about a succession of points. There is no succession of points on a circle that is straight, even from the point of the intersection to the next point immediately after that. If those two points were horizontal, the line would continue straight from that. A point does not provide an angle. Since no two points on a circle are straight, it cannot provide an angle which requires two straight lines even if the "line" is only two successive points right next to each other. You can pick a point on the path of a circle and draw a straight line through it to get an angle; if you pick the point right after the intersection to draw your straight line through it and the point at the intersection, it cannot be a 90 degree angle.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
05:14 AM
5
05
14
AM
PDT
It seems to me the purpose of the question is to teach the child to recognize the difference between a conceptual problem that can best be solved in the abstract, and a physical problem that is only being represented by a physical image or situation. If you think the problem and the solution lies in the drawing itself, you're likely to get the answer wrong by looking at it for your answer. However, if you think about the problem in the abstract, the answer is easy.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
05:10 AM
5
05
10
AM
PDT
WJM, to see the point, imagine you are a microscopic ant crawling along diameter D, then you hit a bend at the intersection with the circumference C, and turn to follow the new line. Through how many degrees do you turn? That turn is a definite angle and in the limit of smallness the angle is . . . 90 degrees. That turn is real, that angle is real, it can be measured or calculated. As you follow the curve you are again turning through a tiny angle at each fresh step or you would go off along the local tangent line. The scale of our ant is of course infinitesimal and the scale of the steps is infinitesimal. KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
04:58 AM
4
04
58
AM
PDT
I don't get the issue. You can't say the line of the circle is perpendicular at the point of intersection because neither a "point" or a "curve" entails the possibility of an "angle." A line dissecting a circle does not produce "angles" because there is no segment length of a circle that is straight.William J Murray
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
04:49 AM
4
04
49
AM
PDT
F/N: As I got thrown a security message in my own thread, here is a mod to 29: >>By looking at infinitesimally altered numbers, we can ponder a tiny all but zero line segment at C_0 and profitably discuss its characteristics, C_0 + dc, to C_0, such that it is straight so angles can be described, where dc is a length shorter than any 1/n for a finite counting number n. In effect, we are exploiting a limit idea that as we get closer and closer to C_0, the curviness gets closer to a straight line. Thus, we have an interpretation of slope at a point using infinitesimally altered real numbers.>> KFkairosfocus
March 6, 2021
March
03
Mar
6
06
2021
03:16 AM
3
03
16
AM
PDT
VL & AS2, The mirror technique is quite accurate enough to demonstrate intent: semi-circle, as recognised by eye. Recall, all drawings of geometric objects are strictly representational approximations, this isn't technical drawing. Even with TD, there are tolerances. Then, the stretching to find a side issue is itself telling us something, given the focal issue on the table in the OP: the significance of infinitesimals (in suitably tamed, hyperreals form) in clarifying an issue of fairly common Geometry that in turn elucidates tangents to curves, angles, curves, etc and is of course a gateway to the Calculus. It also brings in a case where the perception of a contradiction draws out relevance of an explanation using infinitesimals in resolving it. Taking reciprocals of strictly finite reals, mileposted by the naturals, we can see that the continuum of course has no defined nearest real coordinates (x1, y1) to the point C_0 along the arc. However we also know that any such real pair will not be on the tangent, which touches a curve at one real-value coordinate point. We can call it the osculating point. (And yes, there is a connexion there to Romances.) By looking at infinitesimally altered numbers, we can ponder a tiny all but zero line segment at C_0 and profitably discuss its characteristics, C_0 + dc, to C_0, such that it is straight so angles can be described, where dc is a length shorter than any 1/n for a finite counting number n. Bizarre, but these have actually been around in some form since classical times, and in a circles context give us an easy way to see why a circle's area is pi * r^2: line up wedges from the top and bottom semicircles to create tiny rectangles and add up to exhaust the half-circumferences, i.e. pi * r long and of course r high. Calculus has been peeking in the window for nearly 2,500 years. This concept leads to area under a curve, volume of a solid of revolution and of course an answer to the mathematically calculated volume of a beer barrel or a wine glass or a light bulb. The first, had traditionally been done by the estimation of the skilled Cooper. We need infinitesimals and therefore also their reciprocals, the transfinite hyperreals. KFkairosfocus
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
11:21 PM
11
11
21
PM
PDT
KF, I don't think your mirror idea would resolve the issue if the picture were 0.01° short of 180°. Steve is correct, as I have noted, to point this out. When I taught geometry, at the start of the year I noted a few things we could take as given from the picture, notably that points that looked like they were on a straight line were indeed collinear, because that would have been very tedious to mention in every problem all year long. Other than that, I taught students that you reason from the given info, not just because of how a picture looks. On the other hand, with numerical problems I tried to draw pictures accurately and to scale to give students a real-world experience of whether there answers looked like they made sense. So sometimes problems emphasized working logically from the givens, as in proofs, but other times were more real-world oriented and had considerations beyond the logical reasoning. P.S. to Steve: I always emphasized marking right angle with the "box" symbol when they drew their own pictures to indicate that that was known.Viola Lee
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
08:22 PM
8
08
22
PM
PDT
re 25: I would congratulate you for knowing that one must know the given premises in order to draw a logical conclusion!Viola Lee
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
08:12 PM
8
08
12
PM
PDT
Following from 25 Maybe using an example from another geometric shape would make my point clearer. We know that the Pythagorus theorem applies to right angle triangles. If I provided a triangle that looks like it might be a right angle triangle, with the lengths of the two shorter sides (A and B) provided, could you answer the following true or false question with complete confidence? “The length of the longest side is the square root of the sum of squares of the other two.” Now, answer the same question if it was either stated that this was a right angle triangle, or a small square was drawn in the corner where the two shorter sides meet.Steve Alten2
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
07:14 PM
7
07
14
PM
PDT
Kairosfocus “ The DM Article includes — and I did not excerpt as it was obvious enough — that “The question, accompanied by an image of a semi-circle, asked students: ‘True or false? This shape has two right angles. Explain your answer.’ “” But it was the author of the article who stated that the shape was a semicircle, not the information actually presented to the students. Without providing this information and demanding a true or false answer is like asking you if you have stopped beating your wife and only accepting a yes or no answer. Based on the question asked, and the limited information provided about the shape, would you as the teacher give me marks if I responded that ‘there is insufficient information provided about the shape to determine whether it is a true or false statement?’Steve Alten2
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
06:52 PM
6
06
52
PM
PDT
VL, I am noting that -- and why -- it is effectively settled that it is indeed a semicircle. KF PS: The DM Article includes -- and I did not excerpt as it was obvious enough -- that "The question, accompanied by an image of a semi-circle, asked students: 'True or false? This shape has two right angles. Explain your answer.' "kairosfocus
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
06:40 PM
6
06
40
PM
PDT
I only brought up the importance of being very clear when drafting test questions because of an experience I had while marking a university exam. The question was a fill-in-the-blanks. “The Galápagos Islands are or ____ origin and named after ______.” The answers we were looking for were ‘volcanic’ and ‘giant tortoises’. We had a student who answered ‘volcanic’ and ‘1325’. Although it wasn’t the answer we were looking for, it was a correct answer.Steve Alten2
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
05:55 PM
5
05
55
PM
PDT
KF, I have no idea why you addressed all that to me??? Yes, we all assumed it was a semicircle. The text in the OP called it a semicircle, but the picture just said "this shape". Steve was right that that original problem in the picture should have specifically stated it was a semicircle. However I think we all agree that we don't know why seven year olds were being asked this question.Viola Lee
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
05:17 PM
5
05
17
PM
PDT
VL, behind a planar, front-silvered mirror lies a virtual half universe with images laterally reversed and set back the same distance behind as the objects are in front. This is one legitimate case of a virtual world! One, with rather strict mathematical properties and structures. (Ponder the case of a floating silvered sphere.) As a result of the physics of reflection, if the arc was short of the full circle, the mirror along the secant line would show a lenslike structure, similar to (). Were the secant line beyond the diameter, we would obtain a sort of figure 8, with incomplete balls. Only with a semicircle would we see a rounded, smoothly curved O, a circle; of course, an ellipse would be similar if split symmetrically, a circle is a limiting case of an ellipse, with a parabola another, with the second focal point at infinity. This is what we do see, besides, many people are familiar with the specific shape of a semicircle and the shape in the OP is that. In my native land for example a common food is a patty, which is a folded over pastry circle filled with meat and potatoes to make a working person's meal. The geometry half circle protractor is another common case, though of course that goes a bit beyond the circle. Though it is not stated and the centre is not indicated, the figure is and is intended to be a semicircle. KFkairosfocus
March 5, 2021
March
03
Mar
5
05
2021
03:45 PM
3
03
45
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply