Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Specialist Maths
Gabriel Rayo
Introduction:
Alfred Russel Wallace proposed a method for calculating the radius of the earth, during the 19 th century. This
method a basic knowledge of circle geometry. Circle geometry is part of a special case of geometry called
deductive or Euclidean geometry. Deductive geometry uses the theorems that are related to the shape of an
object and uses logical reasoning to prove certain observations about geometrical figures are true. Therefore,
Circle geometry is a branch of mathematics that uses circle theorem to prove that certain observations about
the geometrical figures inside the shape. Many amazing discoveries have been made by mathematicians and
non-mathematicians by just simply drawing figures with straight edges and compasses. (Haese, et al., 2002) One
of these discoveries was made by Alfred Russel Wallace in the 19th century as explained.
1 2
( + )
2
Before using the formula, proving that it works comes first. Consider the diagram below:
information
given
in
this
diagram
was used to
1 2
= ( + )
2
prove
that
the
radius
is
given
by
By connecting A to the centre of the diagram, which is the bottom of the bisector of the chord AB. Therefore,
the diagram would be shown like this:
Gabriel Rayo
2 + 2
2
Then
r=
r=
1
2
1
2
r=
1
2
simplify
(
(
2 + 2
the
equation:
Therefore, it can be seen that the radius is given by the equation. However, assuming that points A, N, and B
have coordinates (6,8), (9.53, 10.94), and (14, 12) correspondingly, the radius given by the equation above can
be used to locate the centre of the circle (point C (k, h)) on NM as shown in the diagrams above. First the values
for x and y must first be calculated.
Gabriel Rayo
Midpoint formula: (
In this case:
6 + 14 8 + 12
(
,
)
2
2
20 20
=( , )
2 2
= (10, 10)
Therefore, M (10, 10). By placing it in to the distance formula:
Gabriel Rayo
1.1045= x
Therefore, x is equal to 1.05 (2 d.p.) units
Therefore, when the values of x and y are placed into the equation:
1
r=
20
1.05
+ 1.05)
1
2
1
2
1
2
20
1.05
+ 1.05) square of the square root is the value inside the square
(19.047619 + 1.05)
(20.097619)
R = 10.048
= 10.05 (2 d. p.)
Now that the value of r is known the coordinates of C can be calculated. This can be done by using vector
theorems using the values given. When thinking in a vector perspective, r and x are parallel because they both
go in the same direction (both coordinates are positive). Therefore, by using the parallel theorem:
r = k(x)
where k is a scalar of x
Now when the values of r and x are placed in, the value of k can be calculated.
10.05 = k(1.05)
10.05
1.05
X = 9.57
Since r is also equal to NC, when NC is represented as a direction vector:
[(k-9.53), (h 10.94)]
The same can be done for NM:
[(10-9.53), (10 10.94)]
[0.47, -0.94]
Since r = k(x), then:
[(k-9.53), (h 10.94)]= k [0.47, -0.94]
The value of k is known, then when placed into the expression:
[(k-9.53), (h 10.94)]= 9.57 [0.47, -0.94]
[(k-9.53), (h 10.94)]= [4.4979, -8.9958]
Therefore, it can be said that:
(k-9.53) = 4.4979 This is because the x value is equal to k-x1
K = 4.4979+9.53
Gabriel Rayo
K = 14.03 (3 d.p.)
This graph shows that the centre of the circle is C, which has coordinates (14.03, 1.94). This can be seen as all
three lines that have been drawn meet at the centre of the circle. According to the Chord of a line theorem, the
bisector chord line goes through the centre of the circle. Therefore, if three bisector lines were drawn, then the
intercept of all three lines would be at the centre as shown.
1
2
Gabriel Rayo
(Australian Science
Mathematics School, 2015)
Let the midpoint of RP be M.
According to the Intersecting Chords Theorem, the length of MS multiplied by the length of QM is equal to the
length of RM multiplied by the length of MP.
In other words:
MS*QM = RM*MP
Looking at the diagram QM = x, and RM = y
Since M is the middle point of RP (as explained in the previous part), then RM = MP. Therefore, MP is equal to
y. It can be seen that QS is the diameter of the circle. Therefore, the value of MS is equal to QS-QM. This is
because as it can be seen that MS is not the full diameter of the circle, but when QM is added, then the diameter
of the circle is calculated, which is:
QS = MS + QM
Therefore, MS is equal to
MS = QS QM (take QM of both sides)
As QM is equal to x, and QS is equal to the diameter. The diameter is then equal to 2 radius. Therefore MS is:
MS = 2r x
Therefore, the by substituting in the variables into the Intersecting Chords Theorem:
Gabriel Rayo
(2r-x)x = y(y)
Simplify:
2rx-x2= y2
Since the value of r is desired for this inquiry, the equation must be re-arranged to fit the criteria, therefore:
2rx-x2= y2
2rx= y2 + x2 add both sides by x2 to transfer x2 to the other side of the equation
R=
2 + 2
2
R=
2 + 2
2
1 2 + 2
R= (
2
1 2
R= (
2
1 2
R= (
2
+ ) x cancels out
R= (
2
+ )
R= (
2
+ )
He was able to perform this investigation by setting up three vertical poles that are at the same height in sea
level in a straight line. These poles are exactly 2 metres apart along a straight canal. When he looked from one
end of along the top of the three poles, the middle pole was seen to be a little higher. Wallace then measured
this height difference as accurately as possible and it was determined that the height differential is 314 mm.
Gabriel Rayo
As seen from the diagram above, the three poles are points A, D, and C. The canal is the line that connects A to
D which is 2 km apart as told by the description. However, the question is, why would the middle pole be higher
by 314 mm to the other two poles? The answer is simple. Even though that the poles are at the same height
above sea level, the ground is not flat, in fact it is actually curved. Therefore, if the middle pole was placed at
the highest point on the curve, and the two poles were placed at the end of the curve, then the middle pole
would be higher compared to the other poles. This is seen in the diagram above. The middle pole is on the
highest point on the curve, whilst the other two poles are on the lowest point of that curve. Therefore, the
middle pole is higher than both of the two other poles. The two other poles are on the same height as they are
both on the lowest point on the curve, and since they both have the same height above sea level, then their
heights are the same.
It can be seen that when the appropriate sketches are drawn on Earth to represent the experiment done by
Alfred Russel Wallace, that it represents a circle that is cut a by chord from the first pole to the third pole. Then
the middle pole connects directly from the centre of the Earth. Therefore, the radius formula can be used:
1 2
R= (
2
+ )
1 2
( + )
2
1 20002
(
+ 0.314)
2 0.314
Gabriel Rayo
1 4,000,000
(
+ 0.314)
2
0.314
1
(12,738,853.5032 + 0.314)
2
=
1
(12,738,853.81712)
2
= 6,369,427
Since the length of the values were converted into metres, the value gathered from the formula is metres.
However, to make things easier, it can be converted into kilometres by dividing the number by 1000. Therefore,
the radius of the earth is 6,369.43 km.
According to experts the radius of the Earth is equal to 6,371 km. However, the value gathered from the formula
is 6, 369 km. This 2 km difference is because of how the Earth is shaped. The Earths shape is what people would
call an oblate spheroid. An oblate spheroid is gathered from two terms oblate and spheroid. Oblate means
that the shape is slightly oblong in appearance, and the spheroid means that the shape of an object is almost a
sphere. However, the Earth is only very slightly oblate. This can be seen from the diameter of the Earth form the
North to the South Pole, which is approx. 12,714 km, and the diameter of the equator which is 12, 756 km. It
can be seen that there is not a big difference between, but this difference suggests that the Earth is not quite a
sphere. There three pieces of evidence that supports that the Earth is not a sphere. The first evidence is pictures
taken from space. The Earth is close to being a perfect circle that it would look like a sphere from space, however,
if accurate measurements are conducted it can be shown that the Earth is not a perfect circle. Another evidence
is that very accurate measurements of the positions of the stars also provide evidence that the Earths shape is
not a perfect circle. The position of the stars and Sun appear to change between great distances on the Earths
surface. The last evidence that the Earth is not completely spherical, is precise gravity measurements. The pull
of gravity changes as the distance of the object from the centre of the Earth, as a result the further away it is
from the centre the less the object ways. If the Earth was a perfect circle, then the weight of the object would
be the same on any place on the Earth. However, the weight of an object varies as it changes position on the
surface of the Earth. Therefore, the Earths shape is an oblate spheroid. (Elkins, 2003)
Therefore, the limitations of the radius formula is that the shape of the circle has to be a perfect circle. This is
because when the object is not a perfect circle, the radius on the elongated side of the circle is longer compared
to the flattened side of the circle. This is true in the case of the Earth. The actual radius of the Earth is 6,371 km,
whilst using the radius formula it is 6,369 km. As explained in the paragraph above, the earth is not a perfect
circle. As a result the radius of one side is shorter than another side. Another evidence that supports the
limitations is that the diagrams in Parts 1 and 2, where the circles are perfect circles. The radius calculated from
the diagrams are all the same.
The assumption that affected the value of the radius is:
1.
That the cross-section of the Earth was a circle, however that is not the case for the Earth. The earth is
shaped like a flattened circle, which means that part of it has a bigger radius than another.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the results show that the radius formula derived by Alfred Russel Wallace can be proven by
using mathematical methods such as using circle geometry (using circle theorems), and vector theorems. It
also shows that the method proposed by Alfred Russel Wallace to calculate the radius of the Earth is
supported by the investigation conducted in this report. However, this method is only limited to perfect circles
which can be seen also from the results.
Gabriel Rayo
References
Australian Science Mathematics School, 2015. How Big is The Earth?, Adelaide : Australian Science
Mathematics School.
Elkins, T., 2003. Oblate Spheroid. [Online]
Available at: http://regentsprep.org/regents/earthsci/units/introduction/oblate.cfm
[Accessed 30 April 2015].
Haese, R. et al., 2002. Specialist Maths. In: mathematics for year 12 Speciialist Maths. Adelaide:
Haese & Harris Publications, p. 184.
10