Misplaced Pages

Proof that 22/7 exceeds π: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:27, 1 October 2020 edit2409:4052:2292:7007:5c45:2b42:51a3:7918 (talk) The proofTags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit← Previous edit Latest revision as of 03:07, 19 December 2024 edit undoDavid Eppstein (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators225,786 editsm Reverted edit by 125.62.206.142 (talk) to last version by 113.193.139.54Tag: Rollback 
(39 intermediate revisions by 29 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{short description|Mathematical proof related to the constant pi}} {{short description|This is the Mathematical proof related to the constant pi 22/7 calculate the area of the sector
c}}
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Proof that 22/7 exceeds {{pi}}}} {{DISPLAYTITLE:Proof that 22/7 exceeds {{pi}}}}
]
{{Pi box}} {{Pi box}}
] of the mathematical result that the ] {{sfrac|22|7}} is greater than ] (pi) date back to antiquity. One of these proofs, more recently developed but requiring only elementary techniques from calculus, has attracted attention in modern mathematics due to its ] and its connections to the theory of ]. Stephen Lucas calls this proof "one of the more beautiful results related to approximating {{pi}}".<ref name="Lucas2005">{{Citation ] of the mathematical result that the ] {{sfrac|22|7}} is greater than ] (pi) date back to antiquity. One of these proofs, more recently developed but requiring only elementary techniques from calculus, has attracted attention in modern mathematics due to its ] and its connections to the theory of ]. Stephen Lucas calls this proof "one of the more beautiful results related to approximating {{pi}}".<ref name="Lucas2005">{{Citation
| last = Lucas | last = Lucas
| first = Stephen | first = Stephen
Line 36: Line 38:
\end{align}</math> \end{align}</math>


The approximation has been known since antiquity. ] wrote the first known proof that {{sfrac|22|7}} is an overestimate in the 3rd century BCE, although he may not have been the first to use that approximation. His proof proceeds by showing that {{sfrac|22|7}} is greater than the ratio of the ] of a ] with 96 sides to the diameter of a circle it circumscribes. {{refn|group=note|Proposition 3: The ratio of the circumference of any circle to its diameter is less than {{sfrac|3|1|7}} but greater than {{sfrac|3|10|71}}.<ref>{{Citation | author=Archimedes | editor-last=Heath | editor-first=T.L. | editor-link=Thomas Little Heath | origyear=1897 | date=2002 | title=The Works of Archimedes | publisher=Dover Publications | pages=93-96 | chapter=Measurement of a circle | isbn=0-486-42084-1 | url=https://archive.org/details/worksofarchimede029517mbp}}</ref>}} The approximation has been known since antiquity. ] wrote the first known proof that {{sfrac|22|7}} is an overestimate in the 3rd century BCE, although he may not have been the first to use that approximation. His proof proceeds by showing that {{sfrac|22|7}} is greater than the ratio of the ] of a ] with 96 sides to the diameter of a circle it circumscribes.{{refn|group=note|Proposition 3: The ratio of the circumference of any circle to its diameter is less than {{sfrac|3|1|7}} but greater than {{sfrac|3|10|71}}.<ref>{{Citation | author=Archimedes | editor-last=Heath | editor-first=T.L. | editor-link=Thomas Little Heath | orig-year=1897 | date=2002 | title=The Works of Archimedes | publisher=Dover Publications | pages=93–96 | chapter=Measurement of a circle | isbn=0-486-42084-1 | url=https://archive.org/details/worksofarchimede029517mbp}}</ref>}}


== The prof == == Proof ==
The proof can be expressed very succinctly: The proof can be expressed very succinctly:


Line 45: Line 47:
Therefore, {{sfrac|22|7}}&nbsp;>&nbsp;{{pi}}. Therefore, {{sfrac|22|7}}&nbsp;>&nbsp;{{pi}}.


The evaluation of this integral was the first problem in the 1968 ].<ref>{{Citation The evaluation of this integral was the first problem in the 1968 ].<ref>{{Citation
| editor1-last = Alexanderson | editor1-last = Alexanderson
| editor1-first = Gerald L. | editor1-link = Gerald L. Alexanderson | editor1-first = Gerald L. | editor1-link = Gerald L. Alexanderson
Line 56: Line 58:
| publisher = The Mathematical Association of America | publisher = The Mathematical Association of America
| year = 1985 | year = 1985
| url = https://books.google.com/?id=HNLRgSGZrWMC&pg=PA9&dq=December-7-1968+Putnam+Mathematical-Competition | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=HNLRgSGZrWMC&dq=December-7-1968+Putnam+Mathematical-Competition&pg=PA9
| isbn = 0-88385-463-5 | isbn = 0-88385-463-5
| zbl = 0584.00003}}</ref> | zbl = 0584.00003}}</ref>
It is easier than most Putnam Competition problems, but the competition often features seemingly obscure problems that turn out to refer to something very familiar. This integral has also been used in the entrance examinations for the ].<ref> {{dead link|date=April 2018|bot=medic}}{{cbignore|bot=medic}}, question 38 on page 15 of the mathematics section.</ref> It is easier than most Putnam Competition problems, but the competition often features seemingly obscure problems that turn out to refer to something very familiar. This integral has also been used in the entrance examinations for the ].<ref>, question 41 on page 12 of the mathematics section.</ref>


==Details of evaluation of the integral== ==Details of evaluation of the integral==
That the ] is positive follows from the fact that the ] is ], being a quotient involving only sums and products of powers of non-negative ]. In addition, one can easily check that the integrand is strictly positive for at least one point in the range of integration, say at {{sfrac|1|2}}. Since the integrand is continuous at that point and non-negative elsewhere, the integral from 0 to 1 must be strictly positive. That the ] is positive follows from the fact that the ] is ]; the denominator is positive and the numerator is a product of nonnegative numbers. One can also easily check that the integrand is strictly positive for at least one point in the range of integration, say at {{sfrac|1|2}}. Since the integrand is continuous at that point and nonnegative elsewhere, the integral from 0 to 1 must be strictly positive.


It remains to show that the integral in fact evaluates to the desired quantity: It remains to show that the integral in fact evaluates to the desired quantity:
Line 107: Line 109:


==Extensions== ==Extensions==
The above ideas can be generalized to get better approximations of&nbsp;{{pi}}; see also {{harvtxt|Backhouse|1995}}<ref>{{citation|last=Backhouse|first=Nigel|date=July 1995|title=Note 79.36, Pancake functions and approximations to {{pi}}|journal=The Mathematical Gazette|volume=79|issue=485|pages=371–374|jstor=3618318}}</ref> and {{harvtxt|Lucas|2005}} (in both references, however, no calculations are given). For explicit calculations, consider, for every integer {{math|''n'' ≥ 1}}, The above ideas can be generalized to get better approximations of&nbsp;{{pi}}; see also {{harvtxt|Backhouse|1995}}<ref>{{citation|last=Backhouse|first=Nigel|date=July 1995|title=Note 79.36, Pancake functions and approximations to {{pi}}|journal=The Mathematical Gazette|volume=79|issue=485|pages=371–374|doi=10.2307/3618318|jstor=3618318|s2cid=126397479 }}</ref> and {{harvtxt|Lucas|2005}} (in both references, however, no calculations are given). For explicit calculations, consider, for every integer {{math|''n'' ≥ 1}},


:<math> :<math>
Line 132: Line 134:
where the approximation (the tilde means that the quotient of both sides tends to one for large {{math|''n''}}) of the ] follows from ] and shows the fast convergence of the integrals to&nbsp;{{pi}}. where the approximation (the tilde means that the quotient of both sides tends to one for large {{math|''n''}}) of the ] follows from ] and shows the fast convergence of the integrals to&nbsp;{{pi}}.


Calculation of these integrals: For all integers {{math|''k'' ≥ 0}} and {{math|''ℓ'' ≥ 2}} we have
<div style="clear:both;width:95%;" class="NavFrame">
<div class="NavHead" style="background-color:#FFFAF0; text-align:left; font-size:larger;">Calculation of these integrals</div>
<div class="NavContent" style="text-align:left;display:none;">
For all integers {{math|''k'' ≥ 0}} and {{math|''ℓ'' ≥ 2}} we have


:<math>\begin{align} :<math>\begin{align}
Line 180: Line 179:


Integrating equation (1) from 0 to 1 using equation (2) and {{math|arctan(1) {{=}} {{sfrac|π|4}}}}, we get the claimed equation involving&nbsp;{{pi}}. Integrating equation (1) from 0 to 1 using equation (2) and {{math|arctan(1) {{=}} {{sfrac|π|4}}}}, we get the claimed equation involving&nbsp;{{pi}}.
</div>
</div>


The results for {{math|''n'' {{=}} 1}} are given above. For {{math|''n'' {{=}} 2}} we get The results for {{math|''n'' {{=}} 1}} are given above. For {{math|''n'' {{=}} 2}} we get
Line 222: Line 219:


===Citations=== ===Citations===
{{reflist|2}} {{reflist}}


==External links== ==External links==
* , with this proof listed as question A1. * , with this proof listed as question A1.

{{Calculus topics}}


{{DEFAULTSORT:Proof that 22 7 exceeds}} {{DEFAULTSORT:Proof that 22 7 exceeds}}

Latest revision as of 03:07, 19 December 2024

This is the Mathematical proof related to the constant pi 22/7 calculate the area of the sector c
This is not a perfect 22/7 circle, because 22/7 is not a perfect representation of pi.
Part of a series of articles on the
mathematical constant π
3.1415926535897932384626433...
Uses
Properties
Value
People
History
In culture
Related topics

Proofs of the mathematical result that the rational number ⁠22/7⁠ is greater than π (pi) date back to antiquity. One of these proofs, more recently developed but requiring only elementary techniques from calculus, has attracted attention in modern mathematics due to its mathematical elegance and its connections to the theory of Diophantine approximations. Stephen Lucas calls this proof "one of the more beautiful results related to approximating π". Julian Havil ends a discussion of continued fraction approximations of π with the result, describing it as "impossible to resist mentioning" in that context.

The purpose of the proof is not primarily to convince its readers that ⁠22/7⁠ (or ⁠3+1/7⁠) is indeed bigger than π; systematic methods of computing the value of π exist. If one knows that π is approximately 3.14159, then it trivially follows that π < ⁠22/7⁠, which is approximately 3.142857. But it takes much less work to show that π < ⁠22/7⁠ by the method used in this proof than to show that π is approximately 3.14159.

Background

⁠22/7⁠ is a widely used Diophantine approximation of π. It is a convergent in the simple continued fraction expansion of π. It is greater than π, as can be readily seen in the decimal expansions of these values:

22 7 = 3. 142 857 ¯ , π = 3.141 592 65 {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\frac {22}{7}}&=3.{\overline {142\,857}},\\\pi \,&=3.141\,592\,65\ldots \end{aligned}}}

The approximation has been known since antiquity. Archimedes wrote the first known proof that ⁠22/7⁠ is an overestimate in the 3rd century BCE, although he may not have been the first to use that approximation. His proof proceeds by showing that ⁠22/7⁠ is greater than the ratio of the perimeter of a regular polygon with 96 sides to the diameter of a circle it circumscribes.

Proof

The proof can be expressed very succinctly:

0 < 0 1 x 4 ( 1 x ) 4 1 + x 2 d x = 22 7 π . {\displaystyle 0<\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}\left(1-x\right)^{4}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx={\frac {22}{7}}-\pi .}

Therefore, ⁠22/7⁠ > π.

The evaluation of this integral was the first problem in the 1968 Putnam Competition. It is easier than most Putnam Competition problems, but the competition often features seemingly obscure problems that turn out to refer to something very familiar. This integral has also been used in the entrance examinations for the Indian Institutes of Technology.

Details of evaluation of the integral

That the integral is positive follows from the fact that the integrand is non-negative; the denominator is positive and the numerator is a product of nonnegative numbers. One can also easily check that the integrand is strictly positive for at least one point in the range of integration, say at ⁠1/2⁠. Since the integrand is continuous at that point and nonnegative elsewhere, the integral from 0 to 1 must be strictly positive.

It remains to show that the integral in fact evaluates to the desired quantity:

0 < 0 1 x 4 ( 1 x ) 4 1 + x 2 d x = 0 1 x 4 4 x 5 + 6 x 6 4 x 7 + x 8 1 + x 2 d x expansion of terms in the numerator = 0 1 ( x 6 4 x 5 + 5 x 4 4 x 2 + 4 4 1 + x 2 ) d x  using polynomial long division = ( x 7 7 2 x 6 3 + x 5 4 x 3 3 + 4 x 4 arctan x ) | 0 1 definite integration = 1 7 2 3 + 1 4 3 + 4 π with  arctan ( 1 ) = π 4  and  arctan ( 0 ) = 0 = 22 7 π . addition {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}0&<\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}\left(1-x\right)^{4}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx\\&=\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}-4x^{5}+6x^{6}-4x^{7}+x^{8}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx&{\text{expansion of terms in the numerator}}\\&=\int _{0}^{1}\left(x^{6}-4x^{5}+5x^{4}-4x^{2}+4-{\frac {4}{1+x^{2}}}\right)\,dx&{\text{ using polynomial long division}}&\\&=\left.\left({\frac {x^{7}}{7}}-{\frac {2x^{6}}{3}}+x^{5}-{\frac {4x^{3}}{3}}+4x-4\arctan {x}\right)\,\right|_{0}^{1}&{\text{definite integration}}\\&={\frac {1}{7}}-{\frac {2}{3}}+1-{\frac {4}{3}}+4-\pi \quad &{\text{with }}\arctan(1)={\frac {\pi }{4}}{\text{ and }}\arctan(0)=0\\&={\frac {22}{7}}-\pi .&{\text{addition}}\end{aligned}}}

(See polynomial long division.)

Quick upper and lower bounds

In Dalzell (1944), it is pointed out that if 1 is substituted for x in the denominator, one gets a lower bound on the integral, and if 0 is substituted for x in the denominator, one gets an upper bound:

1 1260 = 0 1 x 4 ( 1 x ) 4 2 d x < 0 1 x 4 ( 1 x ) 4 1 + x 2 d x < 0 1 x 4 ( 1 x ) 4 1 d x = 1 630 . {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{1260}}=\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}\left(1-x\right)^{4}}{2}}\,dx<\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}\left(1-x\right)^{4}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx<\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4}\left(1-x\right)^{4}}{1}}\,dx={1 \over 630}.}

Thus we have

22 7 1 630 < π < 22 7 1 1260 , {\displaystyle {\frac {22}{7}}-{\frac {1}{630}}<\pi <{\frac {22}{7}}-{\frac {1}{1260}},}

hence 3.1412 < π < 3.1421 in decimal expansion. The bounds deviate by less than 0.015% from π. See also Dalzell (1971).

Proof that 355/113 exceeds π

As discussed in Lucas (2005), the well-known Diophantine approximation and far better upper estimate ⁠355/113⁠ for π follows from the relation

0 < 0 1 x 8 ( 1 x ) 8 ( 25 + 816 x 2 ) 3164 ( 1 + x 2 ) d x = 355 113 π . {\displaystyle 0<\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{8}\left(1-x\right)^{8}\left(25+816x^{2}\right)}{3164\left(1+x^{2}\right)}}\,dx={\frac {355}{113}}-\pi .}
355 113 = 3.141 592 92 , {\displaystyle {\frac {355}{113}}=3.141\,592\,92\ldots ,}

where the first six digits after the decimal point agree with those of π. Substituting 1 for x in the denominator, we get the lower bound

0 1 x 8 ( 1 x ) 8 ( 25 + 816 x 2 ) 6328 d x = 911 5 261 111 856 = 0.000 000 173 , {\displaystyle \int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{8}\left(1-x\right)^{8}\left(25+816x^{2}\right)}{6328}}\,dx={\frac {911}{5\,261\,111\,856}}=0.000\,000\,173\ldots ,}

substituting 0 for x in the denominator, we get twice this value as an upper bound, hence

355 113 911 2 630 555 928 < π < 355 113 911 5 261 111 856 . {\displaystyle {\frac {355}{113}}-{\frac {911}{2\,630\,555\,928}}<\pi <{\frac {355}{113}}-{\frac {911}{5\,261\,111\,856}}\,.}

In decimal expansion, this means 3.141592 57 < π < 3.141592 74, where the bold digits of the lower and upper bound are those of π.

Extensions

The above ideas can be generalized to get better approximations of π; see also Backhouse (1995) and Lucas (2005) (in both references, however, no calculations are given). For explicit calculations, consider, for every integer n ≥ 1,

1 2 2 n 1 0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n d x < 1 2 2 n 2 0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n 1 + x 2 d x < 1 2 2 n 2 0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n d x , {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{2^{2n-1}}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}\,dx<{\frac {1}{2^{2n-2}}}\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx<{\frac {1}{2^{2n-2}}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}\,dx,}

where the middle integral evaluates to

1 2 2 n 2 0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n 1 + x 2 d x = j = 0 2 n 1 ( 1 ) j 2 2 n j 2 ( 8 n j 1 ) ( 8 n j 2 4 n + j ) + ( 1 ) n ( π 4 j = 0 3 n 1 ( 1 ) j 2 j + 1 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\frac {1}{2^{2n-2}}}&\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx\\={}&\sum _{j=0}^{2n-1}{\frac {(-1)^{j}}{2^{2n-j-2}(8n-j-1){\binom {8n-j-2}{4n+j}}}}+(-1)^{n}\left(\pi -4\sum _{j=0}^{3n-1}{\frac {(-1)^{j}}{2j+1}}\right)\end{aligned}}}

involving π. The last sum also appears in Leibniz' formula for π. The correction term and error bound is given by

1 2 2 n 1 0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n d x = 1 2 2 n 1 ( 8 n + 1 ) ( 8 n 4 n ) π n 2 10 n 2 ( 8 n + 1 ) , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\frac {1}{2^{2n-1}}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}\,dx&={\frac {1}{2^{2n-1}(8n+1){\binom {8n}{4n}}}}\\&\sim {\frac {\sqrt {\pi n}}{2^{10n-2}(8n+1)}},\end{aligned}}}

where the approximation (the tilde means that the quotient of both sides tends to one for large n) of the central binomial coefficient follows from Stirling's formula and shows the fast convergence of the integrals to π.

Calculation of these integrals: For all integers k ≥ 0 and ≥ 2 we have

x k ( 1 x ) = ( 1 2 x + x 2 ) x k ( 1 x ) 2 = ( 1 + x 2 ) x k ( 1 x ) 2 2 x k + 1 ( 1 x ) 2 . {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}x^{k}(1-x)^{\ell }&=(1-2x+x^{2})x^{k}(1-x)^{\ell -2}\\&=(1+x^{2})\,x^{k}(1-x)^{\ell -2}-2x^{k+1}(1-x)^{\ell -2}.\end{aligned}}}

Applying this formula recursively 2n times yields

x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n = ( 1 + x 2 ) j = 0 2 n 1 ( 2 ) j x 4 n + j ( 1 x ) 4 n 2 ( j + 1 ) + ( 2 ) 2 n x 6 n . {\displaystyle x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}=\left(1+x^{2}\right)\sum _{j=0}^{2n-1}(-2)^{j}x^{4n+j}(1-x)^{4n-2(j+1)}+(-2)^{2n}x^{6n}.}

Furthermore,

x 6 n ( 1 ) 3 n = j = 1 3 n ( 1 ) 3 n j x 2 j j = 0 3 n 1 ( 1 ) 3 n j x 2 j = j = 0 3 n 1 ( ( 1 ) 3 n ( j + 1 ) x 2 ( j + 1 ) ( 1 ) 3 n j x 2 j ) = ( 1 + x 2 ) j = 0 3 n 1 ( 1 ) 3 n j x 2 j , {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}x^{6n}-(-1)^{3n}&=\sum _{j=1}^{3n}(-1)^{3n-j}x^{2j}-\sum _{j=0}^{3n-1}(-1)^{3n-j}x^{2j}\\&=\sum _{j=0}^{3n-1}\left((-1)^{3n-(j+1)}x^{2(j+1)}-(-1)^{3n-j}x^{2j}\right)\\&=-(1+x^{2})\sum _{j=0}^{3n-1}(-1)^{3n-j}x^{2j},\end{aligned}}}

where the first equality holds, because the terms for 1 ≤ j ≤ 3n – 1 cancel, and the second equality arises from the index shift jj + 1 in the first sum.

Application of these two results gives

x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n 2 2 n 2 ( 1 + x 2 ) = j = 0 2 n 1 ( 1 ) j 2 2 n j 2 x 4 n + j ( 1 x ) 4 n 2 j 2 4 j = 0 3 n 1 ( 1 ) 3 n j x 2 j + ( 1 ) 3 n 4 1 + x 2 . ( 1 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}{\frac {x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}}{2^{2n-2}(1+x^{2})}}=\sum _{j=0}^{2n-1}&{\frac {(-1)^{j}}{2^{2n-j-2}}}x^{4n+j}(1-x)^{4n-2j-2}\\&{}-4\sum _{j=0}^{3n-1}(-1)^{3n-j}x^{2j}+(-1)^{3n}{\frac {4}{1+x^{2}}}.\qquad (1)\end{aligned}}}

For integers k, ≥ 0, using integration by parts times, we obtain

0 1 x k ( 1 x ) d x = k + 1 0 1 x k + 1 ( 1 x ) 1 d x = k + 1 1 k + 2 1 k + 0 1 x k + d x = 1 ( k + + 1 ) ( k + k ) . ( 2 ) {\displaystyle {\begin{aligned}\int _{0}^{1}x^{k}(1-x)^{\ell }\,dx&={\frac {\ell }{k+1}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{k+1}(1-x)^{\ell -1}\,dx\\&\,\,\,\vdots \\&={\frac {\ell }{k+1}}{\frac {\ell -1}{k+2}}\cdots {\frac {1}{k+\ell }}\int _{0}^{1}x^{k+\ell }\,dx\\&={\frac {1}{(k+\ell +1){\binom {k+\ell }{k}}}}.\qquad (2)\end{aligned}}}

Setting k = = 4n, we obtain

0 1 x 4 n ( 1 x ) 4 n d x = 1 ( 8 n + 1 ) ( 8 n 4 n ) . {\displaystyle \int _{0}^{1}x^{4n}(1-x)^{4n}\,dx={\frac {1}{(8n+1){\binom {8n}{4n}}}}.}

Integrating equation (1) from 0 to 1 using equation (2) and arctan(1) = ⁠π/4⁠, we get the claimed equation involving π.

The results for n = 1 are given above. For n = 2 we get

1 4 0 1 x 8 ( 1 x ) 8 1 + x 2 d x = π 47 171 15 015 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{4}}\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{8}(1-x)^{8}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx=\pi -{\frac {47\,171}{15\,015}}}

and

1 8 0 1 x 8 ( 1 x ) 8 d x = 1 1 750 320 , {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{8}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{8}(1-x)^{8}\,dx={\frac {1}{1\,750\,320}},}

hence 3.141592 31 < π < 3.141592 89, where the bold digits of the lower and upper bound are those of π. Similarly for n = 3,

1 16 0 1 x 12 ( 1 x ) 12 1 + x 2 d x = 431 302 721 137 287 920 π {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{16}}\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{12}\left(1-x\right)^{12}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx={\frac {431\,302\,721}{137\,287\,920}}-\pi }

with correction term and error bound

1 32 0 1 x 12 ( 1 x ) 12 d x = 1 2 163 324 800 , {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{32}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{12}(1-x)^{12}\,dx={\frac {1}{2\,163\,324\,800}},}

hence 3.141592653 40 < π < 3.141592653 87. The next step for n = 4 is

1 64 0 1 x 16 ( 1 x ) 16 1 + x 2 d x = π 741 269 838 109 235 953 517 800 {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{64}}\int _{0}^{1}{\frac {x^{16}(1-x)^{16}}{1+x^{2}}}\,dx=\pi -{\frac {741\,269\,838\,109}{235\,953\,517\,800}}}

with

1 128 0 1 x 16 ( 1 x ) 16 d x = 1 2 538 963 567 360 , {\displaystyle {\frac {1}{128}}\int _{0}^{1}x^{16}(1-x)^{16}\,dx={\frac {1}{2\,538\,963\,567\,360}},}

which gives 3.141592653589 55 < π < 3.141592653589 96.

See also

Footnotes

Notes

  1. Proposition 3: The ratio of the circumference of any circle to its diameter is less than ⁠3+1/7⁠ but greater than ⁠3+10/71⁠.

Citations

  1. Lucas, Stephen (2005), "Integral proofs that 355/113 > π" (PDF), Australian Mathematical Society Gazette, 32 (4): 263–266, MR 2176249, Zbl 1181.11077
  2. Havil, Julian (2003), Gamma. Exploring Euler's Constant, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, p. 96, ISBN 0-691-09983-9, MR 1968276, Zbl 1023.11001
  3. Archimedes (2002) , "Measurement of a circle", in Heath, T.L. (ed.), The Works of Archimedes, Dover Publications, pp. 93–96, ISBN 0-486-42084-1
  4. Alexanderson, Gerald L.; Klosinski, Leonard F.; Larson, Loren C., eds. (1985), The William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition: Problems and Solutions: 1965–1984, Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America, ISBN 0-88385-463-5, Zbl 0584.00003
  5. 2010 IIT Joint Entrance Exam, question 41 on page 12 of the mathematics section.
  6. Dalzell, D. P. (1944), "On 22/7", Journal of the London Mathematical Society, 19 (75 Part 3): 133–134, doi:10.1112/jlms/19.75_part_3.133, MR 0013425, Zbl 0060.15306.
  7. Dalzell, D. P. (1971), "On 22/7 and 355/113", Eureka; the Archimedeans' Journal, 34: 10–13, ISSN 0071-2248.
  8. Backhouse, Nigel (July 1995), "Note 79.36, Pancake functions and approximations to π", The Mathematical Gazette, 79 (485): 371–374, doi:10.2307/3618318, JSTOR 3618318, S2CID 126397479

External links

Calculus
Precalculus
Limits
Differential calculus
Integral calculus
Vector calculus
Multivariable calculus
Sequences and series
Special functions
and numbers
History of calculus
Lists
Integrals
Miscellaneous topics
Categories: