PrepShorts · Study sheet · Class 9 Mathematics · Chapter 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
Chapter 6 · Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
Slicing a disc into sectors to see where πr² comes from
This video could not be loaded. Reload the page to try again.
Sign in with Google10 min.
Keep your place in this chapter — sign in, it’s free.Sign in
πr² is not a second discovery about circles. It is the circumference formula rearranged, and you can watch one turn into the other.
The idea
πr² is not a second discovery about circles; it is the circumference formula rearranged. Cut a disc into thin sectors and lay them alternately point-up and point-down: the boundary that used to be the circumference becomes two nearly straight edges of half a circumference each, and the radius becomes the height. Area = πr × r. The reason the same constant appears in both formulas is that both are measuring the same circle. What the ancients were missing was never the shape of the answer — they knew the area had to be a fixed multiple of the square of a length — but the multiple, and it took Archimedes to identify it as the very constant already sitting in the perimeter formula.
What you should be able to do
- Explain why the ratio of the square of a perimeter to an area is fixed for a family of scale copies, and compute it for a square and for an equilateral triangle
- Deduce that the same must hold for circles, and identify what remains unknown after that deduction
- State the Babylonian and Egyptian estimates of the circle's area constant, and convert each into the value it implies for π
- State Archimedes' identification of the constant, and his comparison of a disc with a right-angled triangle
- State and use the fact that a regular polygon's area is half its perimeter times the radius of its inscribed circle
- Explain how letting the number of sides grow turns that polygon fact into the circle formula
- Reconstruct Nīlakaṇṭha's slicing argument, and account for the base of the resulting parallelogram being half the circumference
- Identify precisely what the slicing argument assumes, and say why it persuades without proving
- Compute circle areas, and areas of composite figures built from discs and semicircles
Words to know
| Term | Definition in one line | First introduced |
|---|---|---|
| area | the amount of plane a region occupies, measured in unit squares | printed in the §6.6 heading (p. 130) and used throughout §6.10 |
| disc | the filled circular region, as against the circle that bounds it | printed in the §6.10.1 figure captions (p. 147) |
| regular polygon | a polygon with all sides and all angles equal | printed in the Archimedes discussion and the Fig. 6.36 caption (p. 145) |
| incircle | the circle fitting tightly inside a polygon and touching its sides | printed at §6.8.1 (p. 136) and appealed to again on p. 145 |
| Śhulbasūtra | the ancient Indian construction text carrying the same eight-ninths rule | printed, in italic, with the date 800 BCE (p. 145) |
| scale | the size a figure is drawn at, as distinct from its shape | printed in §6.10's scaling bullets (p. 144) |
| thought experiment | Archimedes' method of asking what happens as the side count grows without bound | printed, in quotation marks, at §6.10 (p. 146) |
| circumference | the length of a circle's boundary | printed in bold at the close of §6.1 (p. 120) and used throughout §6.10 |
| slice | one of the thin sectors the disc is cut into before rearranging | printed in the Fig. 6.37 caption and the paragraph after it (p. 146) |
| limiting argument | the move from a sequence of polygons to the circle they approach | an added term; the chapter performs the move and calls it a thought experiment |
| shape constant | a number fixed by a figure's shape and independent of its size | an added compound; not printed in this chapter, which states the property for three shapes without a name for it |
Where people slip up
- **"πr² and 2πr are two unrelated formulas that happen to share a letter."** They are the same fact twice. The slicing picture turns one into the other in front of you, and Archimedes' triangle does it in one line.
- "Doubling the radius doubles the area." It quadruples it, because the radius is squared. The P² : A discussion on p. 144 is built to make squaring feel natural rather than arbitrary.
- **"πr² means πr then squared."** The square is on the radius only. Writing it as π × r × r once, out loud, prevents a large fraction of the errors on this material.
- "The ancients did not know the area was proportional to the square of a length." They did — that is exactly what the chapter's P² : A argument establishes, and what Babylon and Egypt were both estimating. What they lacked was the constant.
- "The slicing argument is a proof." It is a persuasion, and the chapter's own wording is that it gives a way to argue. The arcs never actually become straight, and the step from "closer and closer" to "equal" is the part that needs the mathematics of later classes. Archimedes' route with inscribed and circumscribed polygons is the rigorous one, and the chapter has just described it.
- "The number of circles in Q17 must change the fraction — four fit more tightly than three." It does not, and this is the most satisfying moment in the exercise set. The answer is π/4 for any count, which is why Q18 asks for a conjecture and a proof rather than three more calculations.
- "Whether 256/81 was an improvement depends on the date." It does not. 256/81 from about 1500 BCE is a better value than the √10 the chapter records for 628 CE on p. 122. Accuracy and chronology are separate axes here, as they were in Cornering π: from inscribed polygons to Mādhava's exact series.
Ask your teacher a person
Your teacher reads this and writes back, usually within a day. For an instant answer, use Ask the video in the sidebar.
Your class sees the question and the answer. Only your teacher sees that it was you.
No questions on this topic yet.
Worked answers to this chapter’s exercises
Transcript1,392 words
You know two things about a circle. Its boundary is two pi r, and the region inside it is pi r squared. Those look like two separate discoveries that happen to share a letter. They are not. They are the same fact, written twice. By the end of this you will have watched one turn into the other. And the history is stranger than the formula. People needed this - how much grain a round tower holds, how much ground a round garden takes, what to tax it at.
They had the shape of the answer for thousands of years. What they did not have was one number. Start somewhere easier than a circle. Take a square of side a. Its perimeter is four a, and its area is a squared. Now square the perimeter and divide by the area. Sixteen a squared over a squared. Sixteen. The a has gone. Draw the square at any size you like - tiny, huge, awkward fractions - and that number stays at sixteen.
One warning, because it is the easiest slip in all of this. The square goes on the whole perimeter, not on the a inside it. Put it on the a alone and you get four, which is a different number and is wrong at every size. Now an equilateral triangle of side a. Perimeter three a, area root three over four, times a squared. Perimeter squared over area is nine a squared, divided by that.
The a squared cancels again, and what is left is thirty six over root three. About twenty point seven eight. Not sixteen. So the number is not universal - but it is not arbitrary either. It belongs to the shape, and it says nothing about the size. Call it the shape's own constant. A square has one, an equilateral triangle has another, a regular hexagon has a third. A circle is a shape, and every circle is a scaled copy of every other circle.
So a circle has one of these numbers too. Circumference squared, divided by area, is some fixed thing that does not care how big the circle is. That is real progress, and it is not an answer. It tells you the area is a fixed multiple of the square of a length - which is why doubling the radius quadruples the area, and does not double it. But it does not tell you the multiple.
Finding that one number took about two thousand years. Babylon got there first, well before fifteen hundred BCE, and got there by measuring. Draw circles, measure the boundary, measure the area, take the ratio. Their answer was about twelve. So the rule was: area is the circumference squared, over twelve. Now watch what that says about pi. Circumference squared over area is four pi. If four pi is twelve, then pi is three.
Exactly three. That is the whole of Babylon's circle in one line, and it is low. The true constant is a little over twelve and a half, so twelve falls short by about four and a half per cent. Egypt, around the same time, did something cleverer. Take the diameter, chop off a ninth of it, and square what is left. Eight ninths of d, all squared. Write d as two r and that becomes two hundred and fifty six over eighty one, times r squared.
So their value of pi is two five six over eighty one. Three point one six oh, and a bit. High, but only by about nineteen thousandths. The same rule turns up in ancient Indian construction texts, eight hundred BCE, reached along a completely different road. And here is something worth sitting with. Two thousand years later, a great mathematician used root ten for pi - about three point one six two.
That is off by twenty one thousandths. The older value is the better one. Accuracy and chronology are not the same axis. For a long time the Greeks knew there was a constant and did not know what it was. Then Archimedes, around two fifty BCE, said the thing nobody had said. The constant is pi. Not a number near pi. The very same pi that was already sitting in the perimeter formula.
And they put it in a form you can see. A circle, they said, has exactly the area of a right-angled triangle whose two legs are the radius and the circumference. Check it. Half of two pi r, times r. Pi r squared. The disc and that triangle, side by side, are the whole formula. How do you get there? Not with a circle. Start with a regular polygon, and draw the circle that fits snugly inside it, touching every side.
Call its radius r. Now join the centre to every corner. The polygon falls into triangles, one per side. Each has that side as its base, and every one of them has height exactly r, because r reaches the sides at right angles. Add them up. Half of base times height, over and over, is half of the whole perimeter, times r. That is true of a triangle, a pentagon, a heptagon - every regular polygon there is.
Now the move that makes it a circle. Keep the outer circle fixed and let the polygon inside it grow more and more sides. Six, twelve, twenty four, ninety six. Two things happen at once. The perimeter climbs towards the circumference, and the little inside radius climbs towards the circle's own radius. At ninety six sides the perimeter over the diameter is three point one four one - already right to three decimal places.
So half the perimeter times r is climbing towards half of two pi r, times r. Which is pi r squared. Notice the direction, because it matters later. Every one of those polygons sits inside the circle, so every area is below pi, and every perimeter is below two pi. They climb towards it and never arrive. Around fifteen hundred, Nilakantha gave an argument you can do with scissors. Cut the disc into thin sectors, like slices of a round cake.
Now lay them out in a row, alternately point up, point down, so they interlock. What you get is a long strip. Its two long edges are made of the arcs - the crusts of the slices. Its slanted ends are radii, so the strip's height is r. And if the slices are thin enough, the strip looks like a parallelogram. Base times height. So all that is left is to work out the base.
Here is the step that usually gets skipped, and it takes one sentence. Half the slices point up and half point down. So half the arcs end up along the top edge, and the other half along the bottom. Every arc was a piece of the original boundary, and all of them together are the whole circumference. So each edge is exactly half of it. Pi r. That is not approximate.
At eight slices, at twenty four, at a thousand, each edge of arcs measures exactly pi r. Now finish: base pi r, height r. Pi r times r. The circumference formula has just turned into the area formula, in front of you. One honest thing to end on. That is a persuasion, not a proof, and it is worth knowing exactly where the gap is. The arcs never become straight.
Flatten them into the straight edges your eye is already drawing and you get a shorter base - at twenty four slices, three point one three, not three point one four - and a figure whose area is about one per cent short of pi r squared. It closes as the slices thin. At a thousand slices each arc bulges from its chord by about five millionths of the radius.
But it closes; it never shuts. The step from closer and closer to equal is the part that waits for later mathematics. And there is a lovely reminder sitting in this. Straighten a disc into just twelve slices and the figure you get has area exactly three. Three, on a circle of radius one. Which is precisely the value of pi that Babylon settled on, thousands of years ago. They were not wrong about the shape.
They had simply stopped cutting too soon.
Where this fits
Taken from the notes each video was made from, not from the reading order — these are the ideas this one rests on and the ones that later rest on it.
Builds on
- Why C/D is the same number for every circleClass 9 · Ch 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
- From rectangle to parallelogram: area survives rearrangementClass 9 · Ch 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
- Perimeter as a walk around the border, and why perimeter-to-side ratios are fixedClass 9 · Ch 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
Comes up again in
- A sector's area is its angle's share of the wholeClass 9 · Ch 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area
Either side of this one
- Baudhāyana's construction: turning a rectangle into a square of matching areaClass 9 · Ch 6, Measuring Space: Perimeter and Area