arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2011.05779

On angular measures in axiomatic Euclidean planar geometry

Abstract

We address the issue of angular measure, which is a contested issue for the International System of Units (SI). We provide a mathematically rigorous and axiomatic presentation of angular measure that leads to the traditional way of measuring a plane angle subtended by a circular arc as the length of the arc divided by the radius of the arc, a scalar quantity. We distinguish between the \emph{angular magnitude}, defined in terms of congruence classes of angles, and the (numerical) \emph{angular measure} that can be assigned to each congruence class in such a way that, e.g., the right angle has the numerical value $\frac\pi2$. We argue that angles are intrinsically different from lengths, as there are angles of special significance (such as the right angle, or the straight angle), while there is no distinguished length in Euclidean geometry. This is further underlined by the observation that, while units such as the metre and kilogram have been refined over time due to advances in metrology, no such refinement of the radian is conceivable. It is a mathematically defined unit, set in stone for eternity. We conclude that angular measures are numbers, and the current definition in SI should remain unaltered.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Martin Grötschel, Harald Hanche-Olsen, Helge Holden, Michael P. Krystek. 2020-11-10. On angular measures in axiomatic Euclidean planar geometry. https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.05779

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO