A question about Fermat's method of calculating areas under curves

In summary, the author is trying to find the area of a rectangle using the summation formula for an infinite geometric series, but gets the areas of the rectangles wrong.
  • #1
murshid_islam
457
19
I am currently reading the book "e: The Story of a Number" by Eli Maor. And I got stuck at something. In chapter 7 of the book, the author described the method Fermat used to calculate areas under curves of the form [itex]y = x^n[/itex], where n is a positive integer. I am quoting the relevant bit here (sorry, I can't show the figure, but from the description, you can easily receate it):

Figure 19 shows a portion of the curve [itex]y = x^n[/itex] between the points [itex]x = 0[/itex] and [itex]x = a[/itex] on the x-axis. We imagine that the interval from [itex]x = 0[/itex] to [itex]x = a[/itex] is divided into an infinite number of subintervals by the points ... K, L, M, N, where ON = a. Then, starting at N and working backward, if these intervals are to form a decreasing geometric progression, we have ON = a, OM = ar, OL = ar2, and so on, where r is less than 1. The heights (ordinates) to the curve at these points are then [itex]a^n[/itex], [itex](ar)^n[/itex], [itex](ar^{2})^n[/itex], ... From this it is easy to find the area of each rectangle and then sum up the areas, using the summation formula for an infinite geometric series. The result is the formula,

[tex]A_{r} = \frac{a^{n+1}(1-r)}{1 - r^{n+1}}[/tex]

where the subscript r under the A indicates that this area still depends on our choice of r.
Now I can't get to the final formula. The areas of each rectangle I found are [itex]a^{n+1}, (ar)^{n+1}, (ar^{2})^{n+1},[/itex] and so on. Their sum,

[tex]A_{r} = a^{n+1} + (ar)^{n+1} + (ar^{2})^{n+1} + \cdots[/tex]
[tex]= a^{n+1}\left(1 + r^{n+1} + r^{2(n+1)} + \cdots \right)[/tex]
[tex]= \frac{a^{n+1}}{1 - r^{n+1}}[/tex]Where am I getting wrong?
.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
You are using the ordinates to get the heights of the rectangles. I think the formula is based on using the averages of the adjacent ordinates to get the rectangle heights,
 
  • #3
mathman said:
You are using the ordinates to get the heights of the rectangles. I think the formula is based on using the averages of the adjacent ordinates to get the rectangle heights,

Thanks, but that was not it. I've just figured out my mistake. I got the areas of the rectangles wrong. The sum of the areas would be,

[tex]A_r = (a - ar)a^n + (ar - ar^2)(ar)^n + (ar^2 - ar^3)(ar^2)^n + \cdots[/tex]
[tex]A_r = a^{n+1}(1 - r) \left(1 + r^{n+1} + r^{2(n+1)} + \cdots \right)[/tex]
[tex]A_r = \frac{a^{n+1}(1 - r)}{1 - r^{n+1}}[/tex]
 
  • #4
murshid_islam said:
The areas of each rectangle I found are [itex]a^{n+1}, (ar)^{n+1}, (ar^{2})^{n+1},[/itex]
.

I don't understand how you got those areas. Does the base of the first rectangle have length = a or does it have length = (a - ar)?
 
  • #5
Stephen Tashi said:
I don't understand how you got those areas. Does the base of the first rectangle have length = a or does it have length = (a - ar)?

Yes, that's the mistake I made. I posted the correct calculation in this post: https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3604692&postcount=3"

The bases are (a - ar), (ar - ar2), (ar2 - ar3), and so on.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Related to A question about Fermat's method of calculating areas under curves

1. What is Fermat's method of calculating areas under curves?

Fermat's method of calculating areas under curves, also known as the "method of exhaustion," is a mathematical technique developed by French mathematician Pierre de Fermat in the 17th century. It involves dividing a curve into smaller and smaller sections and approximating the area of each section using simple geometric shapes. By summing up the areas of these approximations, a close estimate of the total area under the curve can be obtained.

2. How is Fermat's method different from other methods of finding areas under curves?

Unlike other methods, such as the use of Riemann sums or integral calculus, Fermat's method does not require the use of limits or infinitesimals. Instead, it relies on geometric intuition and basic arithmetic operations.

3. What types of curves can be evaluated using Fermat's method?

Fermat's method can be applied to any continuous curve, as long as it can be divided into smaller sections and the area of each section can be approximated.

4. What are the limitations of Fermat's method?

One limitation of Fermat's method is that it can only provide an approximation of the area under a curve, rather than an exact value. Additionally, it can be time-consuming and labor-intensive to calculate the areas of numerous small sections to obtain a more accurate estimate.

5. In what real-world applications is Fermat's method used?

Fermat's method has been used in various fields, including engineering, physics, and economics, to estimate areas under curves and solve optimization problems. It has also been applied in the study of planetary motion and the calculation of the area of irregular shapes on maps.

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
552
Replies
2
Views
501
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Calculus
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
458
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
494
Back
Top