Eighteen Essays on Non-Euclidean Geometry

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Eighteen Essays on Non-Euclidean Geometry Introduction Classically, the expression “non-Euclidean geometry” refers to the two geometries of non-zero constant curvature, namely, the spherical and the hyperbolic.1 Spheri- cal geometry was developed in Greek antiquity and it attained there a high degree of matureness, especially in the work of Menelaus of Alexandria (1st–2nd centuries A.D.).2 Hyperbolic geometry is a nineteenth century achievement. It was discov- ered by Lobachevsky, Bolyai and Gauss, with a few anticipated results obtained in the eighteenth century, especially in the work of J. H. Lambert who developed a ge- ometry (which, from his point of view, was hypothetical), in which all the Euclidean axioms hold except the parallel postulate and where the latter is replaced by its nega- tion. Although Lambert’s goal was to find a contradiction in the consequences of this system of axioms (like many other prominent geometers, he thought that such a ge- ometry cannot exist), the net result of his investigations is a collection of interesting theorems in hyperbolic geometry.3 In the present volume, the term “non-Euclidean geometry” is used in a broader sense, including geometries such as de Sitter, anti-de Sitter and others which can be developed, in analogy with the three classical geometries, in the framework of projec- tive geometry, using the language of conics, quadrics and quadratic forms. Studying the three classical geometries in the setting of projective geometry is also a nineteenth century achievement; it is due to the visions of Cayley, Klein, Beltrami, Poincaré, and a few others. Today, non-Euclidean geometry in this generalized sense is a very active research field and it seemed to us that editing a book containing self-contained surveys touch- ing several aspects of this domain was desirable for researchers and those who want to learn this subject. This is the reason for which this book is published. 1 The expression “non-Euclidean geometry,” to denote spherical and hyperbolic geometry, was coined by Gauss. 2 The first English edition of Menelaus’ work just appeared in press: R. Rashed and A. Papadopou- los, Menelaus’ Spherics: early translation and al-M¯ah¯an¯ı/al-Haraw¯ı’s version, Scientia Graeco-Arabica 21, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, 2017. 3 J. H. Lambert, “Theorie der Parallellinien,” in Die Theorie der Parallellinien von Euklid bis auf Gauss, eine Urkundensammlung zur Vorgeschichte der nichteuklidischen Geometrie (P.Stäckel and F. En- gel, eds.), B. G. Teubner, Leipzig 1895. French translation by A. Papadopoulos and G. Théret, La théorie des lignes parallèles de Johann Heinrich Lambert, Sciences dans l’Histoire, Blanchard, Paris, 2014. There is no English translation available of this work. viii V. Alberge and A. Papadopoulos Geometry is one of these mathematical fields (probably the unique one to such a great extent) where the texts of the ancient great authors keep their full value, and going through them is not a matter of vain curiosity nor a matter of being interested in history, but it is the best way to understand present day mathematics. In this sense, the rapid growth of non-Euclidean geometry in the last few decades, after its revival by Thurston in the 1970s, is also a return to the sources of geometry. This is why the names of Menelaus, Pappus, Euler, Lambert, Lagrange, Lexell, Fuss, Schubert, Chasles, Study, Story, and several others are mentioned at several occasions in the various essays that constitute this volume. Going throughout these works also shows how slow is the process of development of geometry, despite the rapid (quantitative) growth of the literature in this field. The slow evolution process of mathematics is marked out by abrupt changes attached to names such as those we just mentioned. Before describing in some detail the content of this volume, we would like to make a few remarks on two topics that are at the heart of the various surveys that constitute it, namely, the notion of area in non-Euclidean geometry, and the geometry of conics. In spherical geometry, the area of a triangle is (up to a constant multiplicative factor) the excess of its angle sum with respect to two right angles. In other words, the area of a triangle with angles A;B;C is equal to A B C , up to a constant C C factor that does not depend on the choice of the triangle. In hyperbolic geometry, the area of a triangle is (again up to a constant factor) the deficiency of the angle sum with respect to two right angles, that is, .A B C/. The fact that in C C spherical (respectively hyperbolic) geometry the angle excess (respectively the angle deficiency) of an arbitrary triangle is positive, is probably the most important feature in that geometry. As a matter of fact, there exist classical proofs of the trigonometric formulae in spherical and hyperbolic geometries that are exclusively based on these properties. The oldest such proofs that we are aware of are due to L. Gérard,4 a student of Poincaré. Since the trigonometric formulae contain in essence all the geo- metric information on a space, spherical and hyperbolic geometry are essentially the geometries where angle excess or, respectively, angle deficiency of all triangles are positive. Thus, it is not surprising that several chapters in the present volume concern the notion of area and its use in non-Euclidean geometry. After area, one naturally considers volume in higher-dimensional spherical and Euclidean geometries, and here we enter into the realm of difficult problems. One might recall in this respect that Gauss, in a letter to Wolfgang Bolyai (the father of János Bolyai, the co-discoverer of hyperbolic geometry), dated March 6, 1832,5 after he gave an outline of a proof of the area formula for a hyperbolic triangle as angle defi- ciency, asked his friend to suggest to his son to work on the determination of volumes 4 L. Gérard, Sur la géométrie non euclidienne, Thèse № 768, Faculté des Sciences de l’Université de Paris, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1892. 5 See Gauss’s Collected works, Vol. 6, p. 221, and the article by P. Stäckel and F. Engel “Gauss, Die beiden Bolyai und die nichteuklidische Geometrie,” Math. Annalen 2 (1897), 149–167. Introduction ix of tetrahedra in three-dimensional hyperbolic space. It is conceivable that Gauss was unaware of the fact that this subject was extensively studied by Lobachevsky dur- ing the same period, but he probably knew from his own experience that obtaining formulae for volumes of tetrahedra in hyperbolic and spherical spaces is a difficult problem. It turns out indeed that there is no simple formula for the volume of a hyperbolic (or spherical) tetrahedron in terms of the dihedral angles that is compa- rable to the formula for the area of a triangle. The existing formulae (first obtained by Lobachevsky) give expressions of volume in terms of an integral function which bears the name Lobachevsky function and which is closely connected to the Euler dilogarithm function. These formulae involve the value of the Lobachevsky function at the dihedral angles of the tetrahedron. Several computations of volumes of tetrahedra were conducted after Lobache- vsky’s work but the progress was slow. Some of the most important conjectures that are open in three-dimensional geometry of hyperbolic (or spherical) space concern volume. We mention incidentally that the computation of volumes of hyperbolic tetrahedra is the subject of Chapter 8 of Thurston’s notes on three-dimensional ge- ometry.6 Talking about volume, let us also mention that there are interesting formulae for volumes of Euclidean tetrahedra that are due to Euler. The latter, in a letter to his friend Christian Goldbach, dated November 14, 1750,7 announced a formula for the volume of a simplex in terms of its side lengths, a three-dimensional analogue of Heron’s formula for the area of a triangle.8 Later on, he gave the proof of that formula, in a paper published in 1758.9 In the same paper, he provided several other formulae for volumes of Euclidean simplices, including a formula in terms of side lengths, and another one in terms of lengths of the three edges abutting on a solid angle along with the three plane angles that these sides form. Finally, let us note that computing area and volume, beyond those of polygons and polyhedra, is another subject that has a long history whose origin can be traced back to the work of Hippocrates of Chios (5th century B.C.) who studied areas of lunes (intersections of two discs) and other figures, and which was brought to a high degree of sophistication in the work of Archimedes (3rd century B.C.). The reader can imagine that computing areas and volumes without the use of the mechanical methods of modern calculus is always a challenging problem. 6 W. P. Thurston, Geometry and topology of three-manifolds, Princeton Lectures Notes, Princeton, N.J., 1979. 7 Letter № 149 in Euler’s volume of his Opera omnia containing his correspondence with Goldbach, Series quarta A, Vol. IV, Birkhäuser, Basel, 2014. 8 Heron’s formula is contained in the Codex costantinopolitanus Palatii Veteris, ed. and transl. by E. M. Bruin, Leiden, 1964. 9 L. Euler, Demonstratio nonnullarum insignium proprietatum, quibus solida hedris planis inclusa sunt praedita, Novi Commentarii academiae scientiarum petropolitanae 4 (1752), 140–160, in Opera om- nia, Series 1, Vol. XXVI, 94–108. x V. Alberge and A. Papadopoulos Let us pass to our second topic, projective geometry and conics. We note right away that the study of conics dates back to Greek antiquity, where the most important treatise on the subject is the multi-volume work of Apollonius of Perga (3rd–2nd c.
Recommended publications
  • Proofs with Perpendicular Lines
    3.4 Proofs with Perpendicular Lines EEssentialssential QQuestionuestion What conjectures can you make about perpendicular lines? Writing Conjectures Work with a partner. Fold a piece of paper D in half twice. Label points on the two creases, as shown. a. Write a conjecture about AB— and CD — . Justify your conjecture. b. Write a conjecture about AO— and OB — . AOB Justify your conjecture. C Exploring a Segment Bisector Work with a partner. Fold and crease a piece A of paper, as shown. Label the ends of the crease as A and B. a. Fold the paper again so that point A coincides with point B. Crease the paper on that fold. b. Unfold the paper and examine the four angles formed by the two creases. What can you conclude about the four angles? B Writing a Conjecture CONSTRUCTING Work with a partner. VIABLE a. Draw AB — , as shown. A ARGUMENTS b. Draw an arc with center A on each To be prof cient in math, side of AB — . Using the same compass you need to make setting, draw an arc with center B conjectures and build a on each side of AB— . Label the C O D logical progression of intersections of the arcs C and D. statements to explore the c. Draw CD — . Label its intersection truth of your conjectures. — with AB as O. Write a conjecture B about the resulting diagram. Justify your conjecture. CCommunicateommunicate YourYour AnswerAnswer 4. What conjectures can you make about perpendicular lines? 5. In Exploration 3, f nd AO and OB when AB = 4 units.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Non-Euclidean Geometry to Teach Euclidean Geometry to K–12 Teachers
    Using non-Euclidean Geometry to teach Euclidean Geometry to K–12 teachers David Damcke Department of Mathematics, University of Portland, Portland, OR 97203 [email protected] Tevian Dray Department of Mathematics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 [email protected] Maria Fung Mathematics Department, Western Oregon University, Monmouth, OR 97361 [email protected] Dianne Hart Department of Mathematics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 [email protected] Lyn Riverstone Department of Mathematics, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331 [email protected] January 22, 2008 Abstract The Oregon Mathematics Leadership Institute (OMLI) is an NSF-funded partner- ship aimed at increasing mathematics achievement of students in partner K–12 schools through the creation of sustainable leadership capacity. OMLI’s 3-week summer in- stitute offers content and leadership courses for in-service teachers. We report here on one of the content courses, entitled Comparing Different Geometries, which en- hances teachers’ understanding of the (Euclidean) geometry in the K–12 curriculum by studying two non-Euclidean geometries: taxicab geometry and spherical geometry. By confronting teachers from mixed grade levels with unfamiliar material, while mod- eling protocol-based pedagogy intended to emphasize a cooperative, risk-free learning environment, teachers gain both content knowledge and insight into the teaching of mathematical thinking. Keywords: Cooperative groups, Euclidean geometry, K–12 teachers, Norms and protocols, Rich mathematical tasks, Spherical geometry, Taxicab geometry 1 1 Introduction The Oregon Mathematics Leadership Institute (OMLI) is a Mathematics/Science Partner- ship aimed at increasing mathematics achievement of K–12 students by providing professional development opportunities for in-service teachers.
    [Show full text]
  • And Are Lines on Sphere B That Contain Point Q
    11-5 Spherical Geometry Name each of the following on sphere B. 3. a triangle SOLUTION: are examples of triangles on sphere B. 1. two lines containing point Q SOLUTION: and are lines on sphere B that contain point Q. ANSWER: 4. two segments on the same great circle SOLUTION: are segments on the same great circle. ANSWER: and 2. a segment containing point L SOLUTION: is a segment on sphere B that contains point L. ANSWER: SPORTS Determine whether figure X on each of the spheres shown is a line in spherical geometry. 5. Refer to the image on Page 829. SOLUTION: Notice that figure X does not go through the pole of ANSWER: the sphere. Therefore, figure X is not a great circle and so not a line in spherical geometry. ANSWER: no eSolutions Manual - Powered by Cognero Page 1 11-5 Spherical Geometry 6. Refer to the image on Page 829. 8. Perpendicular lines intersect at one point. SOLUTION: SOLUTION: Notice that the figure X passes through the center of Perpendicular great circles intersect at two points. the ball and is a great circle, so it is a line in spherical geometry. ANSWER: yes ANSWER: PERSEVERANC Determine whether the Perpendicular great circles intersect at two points. following postulate or property of plane Euclidean geometry has a corresponding Name two lines containing point M, a segment statement in spherical geometry. If so, write the containing point S, and a triangle in each of the corresponding statement. If not, explain your following spheres. reasoning. 7. The points on any line or line segment can be put into one-to-one correspondence with real numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Geometry: Euclid and Beyond, by Robin Hartshorne, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000, Xi+526 Pp., $49.95, ISBN 0-387-98650-2
    BULLETIN (New Series) OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 39, Number 4, Pages 563{571 S 0273-0979(02)00949-7 Article electronically published on July 9, 2002 Geometry: Euclid and beyond, by Robin Hartshorne, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000, xi+526 pp., $49.95, ISBN 0-387-98650-2 1. Introduction The first geometers were men and women who reflected on their experiences while doing such activities as building small shelters and bridges, making pots, weaving cloth, building altars, designing decorations, or gazing into the heavens for portentous signs or navigational aides. Main aspects of geometry emerged from three strands of early human activity that seem to have occurred in most cultures: art/patterns, navigation/stargazing, and building structures. These strands developed more or less independently into varying studies and practices that eventually were woven into what we now call geometry. Art/Patterns: To produce decorations for their weaving, pottery, and other objects, early artists experimented with symmetries and repeating patterns. Later the study of symmetries of patterns led to tilings, group theory, crystallography, finite geometries, and in modern times to security codes and digital picture com- pactifications. Early artists also explored various methods of representing existing objects and living things. These explorations led to the study of perspective and then projective geometry and descriptive geometry, and (in the 20th century) to computer-aided graphics, the study of computer vision in robotics, and computer- generated movies (for example, Toy Story ). Navigation/Stargazing: For astrological, religious, agricultural, and other purposes, ancient humans attempted to understand the movement of heavenly bod- ies (stars, planets, Sun, and Moon) in the apparently hemispherical sky.
    [Show full text]
  • Project 2: Euclidean & Spherical Geometry Applied to Course Topics
    Project 2: Euclidean & Spherical Geometry Applied to Course Topics You may work alone or with one other person. During class you will write down your top problems (unranked) and from this you will be assigned one problem. In this project, we will use intuition from previous Euclidean geometry knowledge along with experiences from hands-on models and/or research. The purpose of this assignment is an introduction to the concepts in the course syllabus as we explore diverse geometric perspectives. Project Components: a) Review content related to your problem that applies to the geometry of the plane / Euclidean geometry / flat geometry. For example, if you have Problem 1 then you might review the definitions of lines and how to calculate them, for Problem 9 you might review some information related to area and surface area, for Problem 10 you might review coordinate systems... You may use our book, the internet, or other sources. b) Why the topic is important in mathematics and the real-world? Conduct searches like \trian- gles are important" or a search word related to your problem and then (with and without quotations) words like important, interesting, useful, or real-life applications. You might also pick some specific fields to see if there are applications such as: Pythagorean theorem chemistry c) Summarize diverse spherical perspectives. You do not need to prove an answer or completely resolve the issue on the sphere. You should look for various perspectives related to spherical geometry, and summarize those in your own words. Try different combinations of search terms related to your problem along with words like sphere, spherical, earth, or spherical geometry.
    [Show full text]
  • Spherical Geometry
    987023 2473 < % 52873 52 59 3 1273 ¼4 14 578 2 49873 3 4 7∆��≌ ≠ 3 δ � 2 1 2 7 5 8 4 3 23 5 1 ⅓β ⅝Υ � VCAA-AMSI maths modules 5 1 85 34 5 45 83 8 8 3 12 5 = 2 38 95 123 7 3 7 8 x 3 309 �Υβ⅓⅝ 2 8 13 2 3 3 4 1 8 2 0 9 756 73 < 1 348 2 5 1 0 7 4 9 9 38 5 8 7 1 5 812 2 8 8 ХФУШ 7 δ 4 x ≠ 9 3 ЩЫ � Ѕ � Ђ 4 � ≌ = ⅙ Ё ∆ ⊚ ϟϝ 7 0 Ϛ ό ¼ 2 ύҖ 3 3 Ҧδ 2 4 Ѽ 3 5 ᴂԅ 3 3 Ӡ ⍰1 ⋓ ӓ 2 7 ӕ 7 ⟼ ⍬ 9 3 8 Ӂ 0 ⤍ 8 9 Ҷ 5 2 ⋟ ҵ 4 8 ⤮ 9 ӛ 5 ₴ 9 4 5 € 4 ₦ € 9 7 3 ⅘ 3 ⅔ 8 2 2 0 3 1 ℨ 3 ℶ 3 0 ℜ 9 2 ⅈ 9 ↄ 7 ⅞ 7 8 5 2 ∭ 8 1 8 2 4 5 6 3 3 9 8 3 8 1 3 2 4 1 85 5 4 3 Ӡ 7 5 ԅ 5 1 ᴂ - 4 �Υβ⅓⅝ 0 Ѽ 8 3 7 Ҧ 6 2 3 Җ 3 ύ 4 4 0 Ω 2 = - Å 8 € ℭ 6 9 x ℗ 0 2 1 7 ℋ 8 ℤ 0 ∬ - √ 1 ∜ ∱ 5 ≄ 7 A guide for teachers – Years 11 and 12 ∾ 3 ⋞ 4 ⋃ 8 6 ⑦ 9 ∭ ⋟ 5 ⤍ ⅞ Geometry ↄ ⟼ ⅈ ⤮ ℜ ℶ ⍬ ₦ ⍰ ℨ Spherical Geometry ₴ € ⋓ ⊚ ⅙ ӛ ⋟ ⑦ ⋃ Ϛ ό ⋞ 5 ∾ 8 ≄ ∱ 3 ∜ 8 7 √ 3 6 ∬ ℤ ҵ 4 Ҷ Ӂ ύ ӕ Җ ӓ Ӡ Ҧ ԅ Ѽ ᴂ 8 7 5 6 Years DRAFT 11&12 DRAFT Spherical Geometry – A guide for teachers (Years 11–12) Andrew Stewart, Presbyterian Ladies’ College, Melbourne Illustrations and web design: Catherine Tan © VCAA and The University of Melbourne on behalf of AMSI 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Alexandrian Mathematics After Euclid — I I I
    4. Alexandrian mathematics after Euclid — I I I Due to the length of this unit , it has been split into three parts . This is the final part , and it deals with other Greek mathematicians and scientists from the period . The previously described works or Archimedes and Apollonius represent the deepest and most original discoveries in Greek geometry that have been passed down to us over the ages (there were probably others that did not survive) , and indeed they pushed the classical methods to their limits . More powerful tools would be needed to make further advances , and these were not developed until the 17 th century . Much of the subsequent activity in ancient Greek mathematics was more directed towards developing the trigonometry and spherical geometry needed for observational astronomy and studying questions of an arithmetic nature . At the beginning of this period there was also a resurgence of activity in astronomy and its related mathematics which continued the tradition of Babylonian mathematics in the Seleucid Empire ( c. 300 B.C.E. – 63 B.C.E) , and although there must have been some interaction , its precise extent is unclear . Eratosthenes of Cyrene Eratosthenes (276 – 197 B.C.E.) probably comes as close as anyone from this period to reaching the levels attained by Euclid , Archimedes and Apollonius . He is probably best known for applying geometric and trigonometric ideas to estimate the diameter of the earth to a fairly high degree of accuracy ; this work is summarized on pages 186 – 188 of Burton . Within mathematics itself , his main achievement was to give a systematic method for finding all primes which is known as the sieve of Eratosthenes.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Rigid Motions) to Make the Simplest Possible Analogies Between Euclidean, Spherical,Toroidal and Hyperbolic Geometry
    SPHERICAL, TOROIDAL AND HYPERBOLIC GEOMETRIES MICHAEL D. FRIED, 231 MSTB These notes use groups (of rigid motions) to make the simplest possible analogies between Euclidean, Spherical,Toroidal and hyperbolic geometry. We start with 3- space figures that relate to the unit sphere. With spherical geometry, as we did with Euclidean geometry, we use a group that preserves distances. The approach of these notes uses the geometry of groups to show the relation between various geometries, especially spherical and hyperbolic. It has been in the background of mathematics since Klein’s Erlangen program in the late 1800s. I imagine Poincar´e responded to Klein by producing hyperbolic geometry in the style I’ve done here. Though the group approach of these notes differs philosophically from that of [?], it owes much to his discussion of spherical geometry. I borrowed the picture of a spherical triangle’s area directly from there. I especially liked how Henle has stereographic projection allow the magic multiplication of complex numbers to work for him. While one doesn’t need the rotation group in 3-space to understand spherical geometry, I used it gives a direct analogy between spherical and hyperbolic geometry. It is the comparison of the four types of geometry that is ultimately most inter- esting. A problem from my Problem Sheet has the name World Wallpaper. Map making is a subject that has attracted many. In our day of Landsat photos that cover the whole world in its great spherical presence, the still mysterious relation between maps and the real thing should be an easy subject for the classroom.
    [Show full text]
  • Spherical Trigonometry Through the Ages
    School of Mathematics and Statistics Newcastle University MMath Mathematics Report Spherical Trigonometry Through the Ages Author: Supervisor: Lauren Roberts Dr. Andrew Fletcher May 1, 2015 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Geometry on the Sphere Part I 4 2.1 Cross-sections and Measurements . .4 2.2 Triangles on the Sphere . .7 2.2.1 What is the Largest Possible Spherical Triangle? . .7 2.2.2 The Sum of Spherical Angles . .9 3 Menelaus of Alexandria 12 3.1 Menelaus' Theorem . 13 3.2 Astronomy and the Menelaus Configuration: The Celestial Sphere . 16 4 Medieval Islamic Mathematics 18 4.1 The Rule of Four Quantities . 18 4.2 Finding the Qibla . 20 4.3 The Spherical Law of Sines . 22 5 Right-Angled Triangles 25 5.1 Pythagoras' Theorem on the Sphere . 25 5.2 The Spherical Law of Cosines . 27 6 Geometry on the Sphere Part II 30 6.1 Areas of Spherical Polygons . 30 6.2 Euler's Polyhedral Formula . 33 7 Quaternions 35 7.1 Some Useful Properties . 35 7.1.1 The Quaternion Product . 36 7.1.2 The Complex Conjugate and Inverse Quaternions . 36 1 CONTENTS 2 7.2 Rotation Sequences . 37 7.2.1 3-Dimensional Representation . 39 7.3 Deriving the Spherical Law of Sines . 39 8 Conclusions 42 Bibliography 44 Abstract The art of applying trigonometry to triangles constructed on the surface of the sphere is the branch of mathematics known as spherical trigonometry. It allows new theorems relating the sides and angles of spherical triangles to be derived. The history and development of spherical trigonometry throughout the ages is discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1409.4736V1 [Math.HO] 16 Sep 2014
    ON THE WORKS OF EULER AND HIS FOLLOWERS ON SPHERICAL GEOMETRY ATHANASE PAPADOPOULOS Abstract. We review and comment on some works of Euler and his followers on spherical geometry. We start by presenting some memoirs of Euler on spherical trigonometry. We comment on Euler's use of the methods of the calculus of variations in spherical trigonometry. We then survey a series of geometrical resuls, where the stress is on the analogy between the results in spherical geometry and the corresponding results in Euclidean geometry. We elaborate on two such results. The first one, known as Lexell's Theorem (Lexell was a student of Euler), concerns the locus of the vertices of a spherical triangle with a fixed area and a given base. This is the spherical counterpart of a result in Euclid's Elements, but it is much more difficult to prove than its Euclidean analogue. The second result, due to Euler, is the spherical analogue of a generalization of a theorem of Pappus (Proposition 117 of Book VII of the Collection) on the construction of a triangle inscribed in a circle whose sides are contained in three lines that pass through three given points. Both results have many ramifications, involving several mathematicians, and we mention some of these developments. We also comment on three papers of Euler on projections of the sphere on the Euclidean plane that are related with the art of drawing geographical maps. AMS classification: 01-99 ; 53-02 ; 53-03 ; 53A05 ; 53A35. Keywords: spherical trigonometry, spherical geometry, Euler, Lexell the- orem, cartography, calculus of variations.
    [Show full text]
  • Hyperbolic Geometry in the Work of Johann Heinrich Lambert Athanase Papadopoulos, Guillaume Théret
    Hyperbolic geometry in the work of Johann Heinrich Lambert Athanase Papadopoulos, Guillaume Théret To cite this version: Athanase Papadopoulos, Guillaume Théret. Hyperbolic geometry in the work of Johann Heinrich Lambert. Ganita Bharati (Indian Mathematics): Journal of the Indian Society for History of Mathe- matics, 2014, 36 (2), p. 129-155. hal-01123965 HAL Id: hal-01123965 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01123965 Submitted on 5 Mar 2015 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. HYPERBOLIC GEOMETRY IN THE WORK OF J. H. LAMBERT ATHANASE PAPADOPOULOS AND GUILLAUME THERET´ Abstract. The memoir Theorie der Parallellinien (1766) by Jo- hann Heinrich Lambert is one of the founding texts of hyperbolic geometry, even though its author’s aim was, like many of his pre- decessors’, to prove that such a geometry does not exist. In fact, Lambert developed his theory with the hope of finding a contra- diction in a geometry where all the Euclidean axioms are kept except the parallel axiom and that the latter is replaced by its negation. In doing so, he obtained several fundamental results of hyperbolic geometry. This was sixty years before the first writings of Lobachevsky and Bolyai appeared in print.
    [Show full text]
  • GEOMETRIC ANALYSIS of an OBSERVER on a SPHERICAL EARTH and an AIRCRAFT OR SATELLITE Michael Geyer
    GEOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF AN OBSERVER ON A SPHERICAL EARTH AND AN AIRCRAFT OR SATELLITE Michael Geyer S π/2 - α - θ d h α N U Re Re θ O Federico Rostagno Michael Geyer Peter Mercator nosco.com Project Memorandum — September 2013 DOT-VNTSC-FAA-13-08 Prepared for: Federal Aviation Administration Wake Turbulence Research Program DOT/RITA Volpe Center TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Basic Problem and Solution Approach........................................................................................1 1.2 Vertical Plane Formulation ..........................................................................................................2 1.3 Spherical Surface Formulation ....................................................................................................3 1.4 Limitations and Applicability of Analysis...................................................................................4 1.5 Recommended Approach to Finding a Solution.........................................................................5 1.6 Outline of this Document ..............................................................................................................6 2. MATHEMATICS AND PHYSICS BASICS ............................................................... 8 2.1 Exact and Approximate Solutions to Common Equations ........................................................8 2.1.1 The Law of Sines for Plane Triangles.........................................................................................8
    [Show full text]