Archimedes - novelonlinefull.com
You’re read light novel Archimedes Part 2 online at NovelOnlineFull.com. Please use the follow button to get notification about the latest chapter next time when you visit NovelOnlineFull.com. Use F11 button to read novel in full-screen(PC only). Drop by anytime you want to read free – fast – latest novel. It’s great if you could leave a comment, share your opinion about the new chapters, new novel with others on the internet. We’ll do our best to bring you the finest, latest novel everyday. Enjoy
5. _Catoptrica_, an optical work from which Theon of Alexandria quotes a remark about refraction.
6. _On Sphere-making_, a mechanical work on the construction of a sphere to represent the motions of the heavenly bodies (cf. pp. 5-6 above).
Arabian writers attribute yet further works to Archimedes, (1) On the circle, (2) On a heptagon in a circle, (3) On circles touching one another, (4) On parallel lines, (5) On triangles, (6) On the properties of right-angled triangles, (7) a book of _Data_; but we have no confirmation of these statements.
CHAPTER IV.
GEOMETRY IN ARCHIMEDES.
The famous French geometer, Chasles, drew an instructive distinction between the predominant features of the geometry of the two great successors of Euclid, namely, Archimedes and Apollonius of Perga (the "great geometer," and author of the cla.s.sical treatise on Conics). The works of these two men may, says Chasles, be regarded as the origin and basis of two great inquiries which seem to share between them the domain of geometry. Apollonius is concerned with the _Geometry of Forms and Situations_, while in Archimedes we find the _Geometry of Measurements_, dealing with the quadrature of curvilinear plane figures and with the quadrature and cubature of curved surfaces, investigations which gave birth to the calculus of the infinite conceived and brought to perfection by Kepler, Cavalieri, Fermat, Leibniz and Newton.
In geometry Archimedes stands, as it were, on the shoulders of Eudoxus in that he applied the method of exhaustion to new and more difficult cases of quadrature and cubature. Further, in his use of the method he introduced an interesting variation of the procedure as we know it from Euclid. Euclid (and presumably Eudoxus also) only used _inscribed_ figures, "exhausting" the figure to be measured, and had to invert the second half of the _reductio ad absurdum_ to enable approximation from below (so to speak) to be applied in that case also. Archimedes, on the other hand, approximates from above as well as from below; he approaches the area or volume to be measured by taking closer and closer _circ.u.mscribed_ figures, as well as inscribed, and thereby _compressing_, as it were, the inscribed and circ.u.mscribed figure into one, so that they ultimately coincide with one another and with the figure to be measured. But he follows the cautious method to which the Greeks always adhered; he never says that a given curve or surface is the _limiting form_ of the inscribed or circ.u.mscribed figure; all that he a.s.serts is that we can approach the curve or surface _as nearly as we please_.
The deductive form of proof by the method of exhaustion is apt to obscure not only the way in which the results were arrived at but also the real character of the procedure followed. What Archimedes actually does in certain cases is to perform what are seen, when the a.n.a.lytical equivalents are set down, to be real _integrations_; this remark applies to his investigation of the areas of a parabolic segment and a spiral respectively, the surface and volume respectively of a sphere and a segment of a sphere, and the volume of any segments of the solids of revolution of the second degree. The result is, as a rule, only obtained after a long series of preliminary propositions, all of which are links in a chain of argument elaborately forged for the one purpose. The method suggests the tactics of some master of strategy who foresees everything, eliminates everything not immediately conducive to the execution of his plan, masters every position in its order, and then suddenly (when the very elaboration of the scheme has almost obscured, in the mind of the onlooker, its ultimate object) strikes the final blow. Thus we read in Archimedes proposition after proposition the bearing of which is not immediately obvious but which we find infallibly used later on; and we are led on by such easy stages that the difficulty of the original problem, as presented at the outset, is scarcely appreciated. As Plutarch says, "It is not possible to find in geometry more difficult and troublesome questions, or more simple and lucid explanations". But it is decidedly a rhetorical exaggeration when Plutarch goes on to say that we are deceived by the easiness of the successive steps into the belief that any one could have discovered them for himself. On the contrary, the studied simplicity and the perfect finish of the treatises involve at the same time an element of mystery.
Although each step depends upon the preceding ones, we are left in the dark as to how they were suggested to Archimedes. There is, in fact, much truth in a remark of Wallis to the effect that he seems "as it were of set purpose to have covered up the traces of his investigation as if he had grudged posterity the secret of his method of inquiry while he wished to extort from them a.s.sent to his results".
A partial exception is now furnished by the _Method_; for here we have (as it were) a lifting of the veil and a glimpse of the interior of Archimedes's workshop. He tells us how he discovered certain theorems in quadrature and cubature, and he is at the same time careful to insist on the difference between (1) the means which may serve to suggest the truth of theorems, although not furnishing scientific proofs of them, and (2) the rigorous demonstrations of them by approved geometrical methods which must follow before they can be finally accepted as established.
Writing to Eratosthenes he says: "Seeing in you, as I say, an earnest student, a man of considerable eminence in philosophy and an admirer of mathematical inquiry when it comes your way, I have thought fit to write out for you and explain in detail in the same book the peculiarity of a certain method, which, when you see it, will put you in possession of a means whereby you can investigate some of the problems of mathematics by mechanics. This procedure is, I am persuaded, no less useful for the proofs of the actual theorems as well. For certain things which first became clear to me by a mechanical method had afterwards to be demonstrated by geometry, because their investigation by the said method did not furnish an actual demonstration. But it is of course easier, when we have previously acquired by the method some knowledge of the questions, to supply the proof than it is to find the proof without any previous knowledge. This is a reason why, in the case of the theorems the proof of which Eudoxus was the first to discover, namely, that the cone is a third part of the cylinder, and the pyramid a third part of the prism, having the same base and equal height, we should give no small share of the credit to Democritus, who was the first to a.s.sert this truth with regard to the said figures, though he did not prove it.
I am myself in the position of having made the discovery of the theorem now to be published in the same way as I made my earlier discoveries; and I thought it desirable now to write out and publish the method, partly because I have already spoken of it and I do not want to be thought to have uttered vain words, but partly also because I am persuaded that it will be of no little service to mathematics; for I apprehend that some, either of my contemporaries or of my successors, will, by means of the method when once established, be able to discover other theorems in addition, which have not occurred to me.
"First then I will set out the very first theorem which became known to me by means of mechanics, namely, that _Any segment of a section of a right-angled cone_ [_i.e. a parabola_] _is four-thirds of the triangle which has the same base and equal height_; and after this I will give each of the other theorems investigated by the same method. Then, at the end of the book, I will give the geometrical proofs of the propositions."
The following description will, I hope, give an idea of the general features of the mechanical method employed by Archimedes. Suppose that X is the plane or solid figure the area or content of which is to be found. The method in the simplest case is to weigh infinitesimal elements of X against the corresponding elements of another figure, B say, being such a figure that its area or content and the position of its centre of gravity are already known. The diameter or axis of the figure X being drawn, the infinitesimal elements taken are parallel sections of X in general, but not always, at right angles to the axis or diameter, so that the centres of gravity of all the sections lie at one point or other of the axis or diameter and their weights can therefore be taken as acting at the several points of the diameter or axis. In the case of a plane figure the infinitesimal sections are spoken of as parallel _straight lines_ and in the case of a solid figure as parallel _planes_, and the aggregate of the infinite number of sections is said to _make up_ the whole figure X. (Although the sections are so spoken of as straight lines or planes, they are really indefinitely narrow plane strips or indefinitely thin laminae respectively.) The diameter or axis is produced in the direction away from the figure to be measured, and the diameter or axis as produced is imagined to be the bar or lever of a balance. The object is now to apply all the separate elements of X at _one point_ on the lever, while the corresponding elements of the known figure B operate at different points, namely, _where they actually are_ in the first instance. Archimedes contrives, therefore, to move the elements of X away from their original position and to concentrate them at one point on the lever, such that each of the elements balances, about the point of suspension of the lever, the corresponding element of B acting at its centre of gravity. The elements of X and B respectively balance about the point of suspension in accordance with the property of the lever that the weights are inversely proportional to the distances from the fulcrum or point of suspension. Now the centre of gravity of B as a whole is known, and it may then be supposed to act as one ma.s.s at its centre of gravity. (Archimedes a.s.sumes as known that the sum of the "moments," as we call them, of all the elements of the figure B, acting severally at the points where they actually are, is equal to the moment of the whole figure applied as one ma.s.s at one point, its centre of gravity.) Moreover all the elements of X are concentrated at the one fixed point on the bar or lever. If this fixed point is H, and G is the centre of gravity of the figure B, while C is the point of suspension,
X : B = CG : CH.
Thus the area or content of X is found.
Conversely, the method can be used to find the centre of gravity of X when its area or volume is known beforehand. In this case the elements of X, and X itself, have to be applied where they are, and the elements of the known figure or figures have to be applied at the one fixed point H on the other side of C, and since X, B and CH are known, the proportion
B : X = CG : CH
determines CG, where G is the centre of gravity of X.
The mechanical method is used for finding (1) the area of any parabolic segment, (2) the volume of a sphere and a spheroid, (3) the volume of a segment of a sphere and the volume of a right segment of each of the three conicoids of revolution, (4) the centre of gravity (a) of a hemisphere, (b) of any segment of a sphere, (c) of any right segment of a spheroid and a paraboloid of revolution, and (d) of a half-cylinder, or, in other words, of a semicircle.
Archimedes then proceeds to find the volumes of two solid figures, which are the special subject of the treatise. The solids arise as follows:--
(1) Given a cylinder inscribed in a rectangular parallelepiped on a square base in such a way that the two bases of the cylinder are circles inscribed in the opposite square faces, suppose a plane drawn through one side of the square containing one base of the cylinder and through the parallel diameter of the opposite base of the cylinder. The plane cuts off a solid with a surface resembling that of a horse's hoof.
Archimedes proves that the volume of the solid so cut off is one sixth part of the volume of the parallelepiped.
(2) A cylinder is inscribed in a cube in such a way that the bases of the cylinder are circles inscribed in two opposite square faces. Another cylinder is inscribed which is similarly related to another pair of opposite faces. The two cylinders include between them a solid with all its angles rounded off; and Archimedes proves that the volume of this solid is two-thirds of that of the cube.
Having proved these facts by the mechanical method, Archimedes concluded the treatise with a rigorous geometrical proof of both propositions by the method of exhaustion. The MS. is unfortunately somewhat mutilated at the end, so that a certain amount of restoration is necessary.
I shall now attempt to give a short account of the other treatises of Archimedes in the order in which they appear in the editions. The first is--
_On the Sphere and Cylinder._
Book I. begins with a preface addressed to Dositheus (a pupil of Conon), which reminds him that on a former occasion he had communicated to him the treatise proving that any segment of a "section of a right-angled cone" (i.e. a parabola) is four-thirds of the triangle with the same base and height, and adds that he is now sending the proofs of certain theorems which he has since discovered, and which seem to him to be worthy of comparison with Eudoxus's propositions about the volumes of a pyramid and a cone. The theorems are (1) that the surface of a sphere is equal to four times its greatest circle (i.e. what we call a "great circle" of the sphere); (2) that the surface of any segment of a sphere is equal to a circle with radius equal to the straight line drawn from the vertex of the segment to a point on the circle which is the base of the segment; (3) that, if we have a cylinder circ.u.mscribed to a sphere and with height equal to the diameter, then (a) the volume of the cylinder is 1 times that of the sphere and (b) the surface of the cylinder, including its bases, is 1 times the surface of the sphere.
Next come a few definitions, followed by certain _a.s.sumptions_, two of which are well known, namely:--
1. _Of all lines which have the same extremities the straight line is the least_ (this has been made the basis of an alternative definition of a straight line).
2. _Of unequal lines, unequal surfaces and unequal solids the greater exceeds the less by such a magnitude as, when (continually) added to itself, can be made to exceed any a.s.signed magnitude among those which are comparable_ [_with it and_] _with one another_ (i.e. are of the same kind). This is the _Postulate of Archimedes_.
He also a.s.sumes that, of pairs of lines (including broken lines) and pairs of surfaces, concave in the same direction and bounded by the same extremities, the outer is greater than the inner. These a.s.sumptions are fundamental to his investigation, which proceeds throughout by means of figures inscribed and circ.u.mscribed to the curved lines or surfaces that have to be measured.
After some preliminary propositions Archimedes finds (Props. 13, 14) the area of the surfaces (1) of a right cylinder, (2) of a right cone. Then, after quoting certain Euclidean propositions about cones and cylinders, he pa.s.ses to the main business of the book, the measurement of the volume and surface of a sphere and a segment of a sphere. By circ.u.mscribing and inscribing to a great circle a regular polygon of an even number of sides and making it revolve about a diameter connecting two opposite angular points he obtains solids of revolution greater and less respectively than the sphere. In a series of propositions he finds expressions for (a) the surfaces, (b) the volumes, of the figures so inscribed and circ.u.mscribed to the sphere. Next he proves (Prop. 32) that, if the inscribed and circ.u.mscribed polygons which, by their revolution, generate the figures are similar, the surfaces of the figures are in the duplicate ratio, and their volumes in the triplicate ratio, of their sides. Then he proves that the surfaces and volumes of the inscribed and circ.u.mscribed figures respectively are less and greater than the surface and volume respectively to which the main propositions declare the surface and volume of the sphere to be equal (Props. 25, 27, 30, 31 Cor.). He has now all the material for applying the method of exhaustion and so proves the main propositions about the surface and volume of the sphere. The rest of the book applies the same procedure to a segment of the sphere. Surfaces of revolution are inscribed and circ.u.mscribed to a segment less than a hemisphere, and the theorem about the surface of the segment is finally proved in Prop. 42.
Prop. 43 deduces the surface of a segment greater than a hemisphere.
Prop. 44 gives the volume of the sector of the sphere which includes any segment.
Book II begins with the problem of finding a sphere equal in volume to a given cone or cylinder; this requires the solution of the problem of the two mean proportionals, which is accordingly a.s.sumed. Prop. 2 deduces, by means of 1., 44, an expression for the volume of a segment of a sphere, and Props. 3, 4 solve the important problems of cutting a given sphere by a plane so that (a) the surfaces, (b) the volumes, of the segments may have to one another a given ratio. The solution of the second problem (Prop. 4) is difficult. Archimedes reduces it to the problem of dividing a straight line AB into two parts at a point M such that
MB : (a given length) = (a given area) : AM.
The solution of this problem with a determination of the limits of possibility are given in a fragment by Archimedes, discovered and preserved for us by Eutocius in his commentary on the book; they are effected by means of the points of intersection of two conics, a parabola and a rectangular hyperbola. Three problems of construction follow, the first two of which are to construct a segment of a sphere similar to one given segment, and having (a) its volume, (b) its surface, equal to that of another given segment of a sphere. The last two propositions are interesting. Prop. 8 proves that, if V, V' be the volumes, and S, S' the surfaces, of two segments into which a sphere is divided by a plane, V and S belonging to the greater segment, then
S : S' > V : V' > S^(3/2) : S'^(3/2).
Prop. 9 proves that, of all segments of spheres which have equal surfaces, the hemisphere is the greatest in volume.
_The Measurement of a Circle._
This treatise, in the form in which it has come down to us, contains only three propositions; the second, being an easy deduction from Props.
1 and 3, is out of place in so far as it uses the result of Prop. 3.
In Prop. 1 Archimedes inscribes and circ.u.mscribes to a circle a series of successive regular polygons, beginning with a square, and continually doubling the number of sides; he then proves in the orthodox manner by the method of exhaustion that the area of the circle is equal to that of a right-angled triangle, in which the perpendicular is equal to the radius, and the base equal to the circ.u.mference, of the circle. Prop. 3 is the famous proposition in which Archimedes finds by sheer calculation upper and lower arithmetical limits to the ratio of the circ.u.mference of a circle to its diameter, or what we call [pi]; the result obtained is 3-1/7> [pi] > 3-10/71. Archimedes inscribes and circ.u.mscribes successive regular polygons, beginning with hexagons, and doubling the number of sides continually, until he arrives at inscribed and circ.u.mscribed regular polygons with 96 sides; seeing then that the length of the circ.u.mference of the circle is intermediate between the perimeters of the two polygons, he calculates the two perimeters in terms of the diameter of the circle. His calculation is based on two close approximations (an upper and a lower) to the value of [root]3, that being the cotangent of the angle of 30, from which he begins to work. He a.s.sumes as known that 265/153 < [root]3="">< 1351/780.="" in="" the="" text,="" as="" we="" have="" it,="" only="" the="" results="" of="" the="" steps="" in="" the="" calculation="" are="" given,="" but="" they="" involve="" the="" finding="" of="" approximations="" to="" the="" square="" roots="" of="" several="" large="" numbers:="" thus="" 1172-1/8="" is="" given="" as="" the="" approximate="" value="" of="" [root](1373943-33/64),="" 3013="" as="" that="" of="" [root](9082321)="" and="" 1838-9/11="" as="" that="" of="" [root](3380929).="" in="" this="" way="" archimedes="" arrives="" at="" 14688/(4673)="" as="" the="" ratio="" of="" the="" perimeter="" of="" the="" circ.u.mscribed="" polygon="" of="" 96="" sides="" to="" the="" diameter="" of="" the="" circle;="" this="" is="" the="" figure="" which="" he="" rounds="" up="" into="" 3-1/7.="" the="" corresponding="" figure="" for="" the="" inscribed="" polygon="" is="" 6336/(2017),="" which,="" he="" says,="" is=""> 3-10/71.
This example shows how little the Greeks were embarra.s.sed in arithmetical calculations by their alphabetical system of numerals.
_On Conoids and Spheroids._
The preface addressed to Dositheus shows, as we may also infer from internal evidence, that the whole of this book also was original.
Archimedes first explains what his conoids and spheroids are, and then, after each description, states the main results which it is the aim of the treatise to prove. The conoids are two. The first is the _right-angled conoid_, a name adapted from the old name ("section of a right-angled cone") for a parabola; this conoid is therefore a paraboloid of revolution. The second is the _obtuse-angled conoid_, which is a hyperboloid of revolution described by the revolution of a hyperbola (a "section of an obtuse-angled cone") about its transverse axis. The spheroids are two, being the solids of revolution described by the revolution of an ellipse (a "section of an acute-angled cone") about (1) its major axis and (2) its minor axis; the first is called the "oblong" (or oblate) spheroid, the second the "flat" (or prolate) spheroid. As the volumes of oblique segments of conoids and spheroids are afterwards found in terms of the volume of the conical figure with the base of the segment as base and the vertex of the segment as vertex, and as the said base is thus an elliptic section of an oblique circular cone, Archimedes calls the conical figure with an elliptic base a "segment of a cone" as distinct from a "cone".
As usual, a series of preliminary propositions is required. Archimedes first sums, in geometrical form, certain series, including the arithmetical progression, a, 2a, 3a, ... na, and the series formed by the squares of these terms (in other words the series 1, 2, 3, ...
n); these summations are required for the final addition of an indefinite number of elements of each figure, which amounts to an _integration_. Next come two properties of conics (Prop. 3), then the determination by the method of exhaustion of the area of an ellipse (Prop. 4). Three propositions follow, the first two of which (Props. 7, 8) show that the conical figure above referred to is really a segment of an oblique _circular_ cone; this is done by actually finding the circular sections. Prop. 9 gives a similar proof that each elliptic section of a conoid or spheroid is a section of a certain oblique _circular_ cylinder (with axis parallel to the axis of the segment of the conoid or spheroid cut off by the said elliptic section). Props.
11-18 show the nature of the various sections which cut off segments of each conoid and spheroid and which are circles or ellipses according as the section is perpendicular or obliquely inclined to the axis of the solid; they include also certain properties of tangent planes, etc.