When one is asked to divide a square into N equal area parts, we commonly think of dividing a square into N equal rectangles. Figure 1 shows an example for N=11.There is another general solution to that problem, in particular we could wrap it up in an enigma: is it possible to divide a square into N square-shaped parts of equal area, N being any integer?
The nested circles structure described in Figure 4 of the Variations of circular area division into equal parts post suggests the following solution.
Step 1. Starting from a circle of radius 1, area π, draw circles of incrementing area 2π, 3π, 4π, 5π, 6π, and so on... The resulting concentric rings have all the same area π.
Step 2. For each circle, circumscribe a square. The resulting squares have area 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, and so on...
Step 3. Conclusion: the areas between each nested squares are equal. The figure illustrates the case for N=11.
So here we have a compass and ruler solution for dividing a square into N equal area parts. An interesting corollary is that this division into N equal parts can be applied to any 2D-figure, whether it be a triangle, a pentagon, any polygon, or even arbitrary drawings, provided that it be circumscribed (or inscribed) in a circle. As an answer to a comment on the preceding post, why not divide Leonardo da Vinci's Vitruvian man into N nested Vitruvian men? There are certainly other applications, one of them has been suggested to me by another comment on the preceding post.
In order to calculate an approximate value of π, Archimedes used a method of exhaustion which consists in inscribing a circle between two identically shaped polygons. Increasing gradually the number of sides of the polygon, the shape of the polygon approaches the shape of a circle. This geometrical approach is at the origin of his numerical approximation of π. Many other ways have been developed to approximate π, especially using infinite series. Geometrical representations of these series are rarely available, probably because no direct link has been found between them and the circle. The benefit of the nested circle and square structure of Figure 2 is that it suggests alternative methods of exhaustion.
For example, we could try to equate the area of a circle to the area of a square in this nested structure. This yields an approximation for squaring the circle (or circling the square). For a circle of radius 1, the area of the circle is π, the area of the circumscribed square is 4. The ratio between both areas is therefore π/4. The procedure to let that ratio go to 1 then follows the following steps.
Step 4. But now the area of the circle is again too small with respect to the square. So for the next fit, we must enlarge the area of the circle a little more than the area of the square. We therefore enlarge the area of the circle by 5, while enlarging the area of the square by 4, as illustrated below.
In order to calculate an approximate value of π, Archimedes used a method of exhaustion which consists in inscribing a circle between two identically shaped polygons. Increasing gradually the number of sides of the polygon, the shape of the polygon approaches the shape of a circle. This geometrical approach is at the origin of his numerical approximation of π. Many other ways have been developed to approximate π, especially using infinite series. Geometrical representations of these series are rarely available, probably because no direct link has been found between them and the circle. The benefit of the nested circle and square structure of Figure 2 is that it suggests alternative methods of exhaustion.
For example, we could try to equate the area of a circle to the area of a square in this nested structure. This yields an approximation for squaring the circle (or circling the square). For a circle of radius 1, the area of the circle is π, the area of the circumscribed square is 4. The ratio between both areas is therefore π/4. The procedure to let that ratio go to 1 then follows the following steps.
Step 1. Draw the initial circle and square with ratio π/4.
Step 2. A better fit would be to inscribe both figures in higher orders of the nested structure. But the area of the circle is too small with respect to the square. So, we must enlarge the area of the circle a little more than the square. We therefore enlarge the area of the circle by 3 while enlarging the area of the square by 2, which is illustrated in the figure below.
Step 3. But now the area of the circle is too large with respect to the square. So for this fit, we must enlarge the area of the circle a little less than the area of the square. We therefore enlarge the area of the circle by 3, while enlarging the area of the square by 4, as illustrated below.
Step 4. But now the area of the circle is again too small with respect to the square. So for the next fit, we must enlarge the area of the circle a little more than the area of the square. We therefore enlarge the area of the circle by 5, while enlarging the area of the square by 4, as illustrated below.
Step 5. As after step 2, the area of the circle is too large with respect to the square... and I become a bit exhausted by drawing at exponentially growing scales;-) but I hope I've shown enough to suggest the continuation of this exhaustion scheme. You can of course rescale the figures, keeping track of the successive numbers and their roots on the figures.
The described method of exhaustion searches for a limit by alternately letting the circular area become larger, smaller, larger, smaller, etc... than the square area, but each time with a reduced fraction. As a limit it can be expressed by the following equation:
It seems we have gone through Wallis' product, which is usually disconnected from any geometrical approach.
______________________________________________________
Profound study of nature is the most fertile source of mathematical discoveries. ~ Joseph Fourier
