EE Hard PDF

Extended Essay
Mathematics
Topic:
Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π
Research Question:
How can an approximation of π be obtained within

different areas of mathematics?
Candidate’s name: Alicja Kuderska
Supervisor’s name: Marcin Borowiak
Word count: 3580
Session: May 2019

Extended Essay - Mathematics
Table of contents
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………2
Archimedes’ Method………………………………………………………………………....3
Buffon's Needle Method……………………………………………………………………18
Gregory-Leibniz Series…………………………………………………………………….24
Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………..33
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………35
1
Introduction
The ratio of a circumference and a diameter – this is the first and simplest definition of
𝜋 number but not the only one. What is 𝜋 may be explained in many ways as the
number appears in many areas not only of mathematics (geometry, calculus, number
theory, statistics, etc.) but also in physics (mechanics, electromagnetism,
thermodynamics, etc.). Moreover, dividing the value of a circumference by diameter
paradoxically is not the best way to get 𝜋. In fact, it gives a rather poor approximation.
These may be the reasons why this number has fascinated mathematicians since
ancient times. First nations that realised the importance of 𝜋 were Babylonians and
Egyptians who, already in 20th century BCE, used very close approximations - 3.125
and about 3.1605 respectively. Then there were Indians, in 4th century BCE, who used
339
unexpectedly good approximation – 108 ≈ 3.139.1
In my work I will present three methods that I think are most interesting for various
reasons and that use different ideas and mathematics in order to show how areas of
this science are intertwined and how mathematicians have always seen problems from
many diverse perspectives and attempted to find new solutions even to already
answered questions.
1
en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 06/01/2019 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
2
Archimedes’ Method
This method, proposed in 250 BCE, by the brilliant scholar Archimedes, is the first one
we know about that gave the approximation of 𝜋 correct to 2 decimal places. For more
than 1,000 years his algorithm had been considered as the best method (which ended
when mathematicians started to use infinite series)2. It is quite astonishing, especially
if you bear in mind the fact that he did not know trigonometry nor calculus, which makes
his calculations longer but easier to understand for more people than other methods
included in this work.
It is an example of “a method of exhaustion” – method common among the ancient
Greek mathematicians first used in 500 BCE to compute the area of a circle by
inscribing inside it a sequence of polygons whose areas converge to the area of the
containing shape.3
In this case Archimedes also used the fact that regular polygons with increasing
number of sides resemble a circle. It means that their perimeters are more similar to
the circumference as number of sides of a polygon tends to infinity.
The method is based on approximating 𝜋 by using the perimeters of regular polygons
circumscribed and inscribed in a circle and obtaining a formula for perimeter of a
2𝑛-sided polygon knowing the perimeter of an 𝑛-sided polygon, starting with hexagon
as presented on Figure 1.
2
en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 30/05/2018 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Antiquity
3en.wikipedia.org. Method of exhaustion. Retrieved 30/05/2018 from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_exhaustion
3
Figure 1.
Archimedes’ works have been translated many times with subtle differences. In this
work I will use Thomas Little Heath’s translation which clearly follows the original 4.
It is important to point out that there are many modern versions of Archimedes’ idea
and they are more simply than the original method but they require knowledge that had
not been discovered yet. In this work I will present one of them too.
In his work “Measurement of a Circle” Archimedes gives a statement that the ratio of
the circumference of any circle to its diameter is shown to lie between the limits of
1 10
3 7 and 3 71 . 5
4 The process presented in the work is performed with the use of materials from: Archimedes' Approximation of
Pi, retrieved on 30/06/18, 12/07/18, 20/07/18, 08/08/18, 13/08/18, 11/09/18 from:
https://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/clindsey/mhf4404/archimedes/archimedes.html
5 www.britannica.com. Archimedes. Retrieved 01/07/18 from:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Archimedes#ref383383
4
Firstly, he worked on the perimeter of a circumscribed polygon.
I. He set 𝐴𝐵 as the diameter of any circle, 𝑂 as its center, 𝐴𝐶 as the tangent at 𝐴
where 𝐶 is the vertex of a regular hexagon, and the angle 𝐴𝑂𝐶 as one-third of
a right angle (see Figure 2.).
Figure 2.
a. Hence, by using relationships between sides in triangles with angles 30°, 60°,
90°, we know that:
𝑂𝐶 2 306
= =
𝐶𝐴 1 153
b. and:
𝑂𝐴 √3 265
= >
𝐴𝐶 1 153
265 1351
Here Archimedes used the approximation of √3 which is: < √3 < . It is
153 780
stated without any explanation - it suggests that he knew the way to calculate
approximations of square roots, however, the possible method will not be
included in this work as it is not necessary for the analysis. Archimedes used
the lower limit of this approximation, I will explain why in the last step of this part.
5
II. Now we draw 𝑂𝐷 which is the bisector of the angle 𝐶𝑂𝐴 meeting 𝐴𝐶 in 𝐷 (where
𝐷 is vertex of a regular dodecagon) as on the Figure 3.:
Figure 3.
a. then due to the theorem stated by Euclid in “Elements” which says: “If an angle
of a triangle is bisected and the straight line cutting the angle cut the base also,
the segments of the base will have the same ratio as the remaining sides of the
triangle […]”6 (see
Figure 4.):
𝐶𝑂 𝐶𝐷
=
𝑂𝐴 𝐷𝐴
Figure 4.
6proofwiki.org. Angle Bisector Theorem. Retrieved 11/07/2018 from

https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Angle_Bisector_Theorem
6
b. so, by properties of proportions:
𝐶𝑂 + 𝑂𝐴 𝐶𝐷 + 𝐷𝐴 𝐶𝐴
= =
𝑂𝐴 𝐷𝐴 𝐷𝐴
𝐶𝑂+𝑂𝐴 𝐶𝐴 𝑂𝐴
𝑂𝐴
=
𝐷𝐴
/ ×( )
𝐶𝐴
𝑂𝐴 𝐶𝑂 + 𝑂𝐴
=
𝐷𝐴 𝐶𝐴
c. then:
𝑂𝐴 𝐶𝑂 𝑂𝐴 306 265 571

= + > + =
𝐷𝐴 𝐶𝐴 𝐶𝐴 153 153 153
𝑂𝐴 571
>
𝐷𝐴 153
d. by Pythagoras’ theorem:
𝑂𝐴 571 571
𝑂𝐴2 + 𝐷𝐴2 = 𝑂𝐷 2 > 153 ⟹ 𝑂𝐴 > 153 𝐷𝐴
𝐷𝐴
2
571
( 𝐷𝐴) + 𝐷𝐴2 < 𝑂𝐷 2
153
571 2 2
1532
𝐷𝐴 + 𝐷𝐴2 < 𝑂𝐷 2
1532 1532
349450 2
𝐷𝐴 < 𝑂𝐷 2
23409
𝑂𝐷2 349450
𝐷𝐴2
>
23409
/√
1
𝑂𝐷 5918 1
> this is another of Archimedes’ approximations: √349450 > 591 8
𝐷𝐴 153
(analogous approximations will be used further when applying Pythagoras’ theorem)
7
III. Now let 𝑂𝐸 bisect the angle 𝐴𝑂𝐷 meeting 𝐴𝐷 in 𝐸 (where 𝐸 is the vertex of a
regular 24-sided polygon) as on the Figure 5.:
Figure 5.
By following the analogous steps as above:
1
𝑂𝐸 1172 8
>
𝐸𝐴 153
IV. Now let 𝑂𝐹 bisect the angle 𝐴𝑂𝐸 and meet 𝐸𝐴 in 𝐹 (where 𝐹 is the vertex of a
regular 48-sided polygon) as on the Figure 6.:
Figure 6.
Here:
1
𝑂𝐹 2339 4
>
𝐹𝐴 153
8
V. Now, the last step Archimedes made in dividing angles: let 𝑂𝐺 bisect the angle
𝐴𝑂𝐹 and meet 𝐴𝐹 in 𝐺 (where 𝐺 is the vertex of a regular 96-sided polygon) as
on the Figure7.
Figure 7.
In this case Pythagoras’ theorem is not used but by properties of proportions:
𝐺𝐴 153
<
𝑂𝐴 4673 1
2
1
VI. Now, as the angle 𝐴𝑂𝐶 was divided four times the angle 𝐴𝑂𝐺 is equal to of
48
right angle. This means that the angle 𝐺𝑂𝐻 (where 𝑂𝐻 is symmetric to 𝑂𝐺 with
1
respect to 𝑂𝐴) is of right angle, making 𝐺𝐻 the side of 96-sided polygon
24
circumscribed on a circle (see Figure 8.)
Figure 8.
9
By comparing the polygon to a circle, it is assumed that its perimeter divided by its
diagonal is approximately equal to 𝜋:
1
𝑃 96𝐺𝐻 96(2𝐺𝐴) 96(𝐺𝐴) 96 × 153 667
𝜋< = = = < =3+ 2 < 31
𝑑 𝐴𝐵 2(𝑂𝐴) 𝑂𝐴 1 1 7
4673 4673
2 2
265
The reason why Archimedes used the approximation √3 > 153 is that at the end he had
𝑂𝐴
to find the inverse of whereby the sign “>” inverted into “<”, thanks to which the
𝐺𝐴
upper limit of the approximation of 𝜋 could be found.
Now the second part of the process may start. We have to find the ratio of the perimeter
and the diagonal of 96-sided polygon inscribed in the circle.
I. Let 𝐴𝐵 be the diameter of the circle and let 𝐴𝐶, meeting the circle in 𝐶 (which is
the vertex of regular hexagon), make the angle 𝐶𝐴𝐵 which is one-third of the
right angle as on the Figure 9.:
Figure 9.
a. we again use the relationships in a triangle with angles 30°, 60°, 90° to find out
that:
𝐴𝐶 √3 1351
= <
𝐵𝐶 1 780
10
Here Archimedes used another approximation for √3 that is its upper limit, for
analogous reason as before.
II. Let 𝐴𝐷 bisect the angle 𝐵𝐴𝐶 and meet 𝐵𝐶 in 𝐷 (which is the vertex of regular
dodecagon) and the circle in 𝐷 and make triangle 𝐴𝐷𝐵 (see Figure 10.). Now:
∡𝐷𝐵𝐸 = ∡𝐴𝐵𝐷 − ∡𝐴𝐵𝐸 = 75° − 60° = 15°
∡𝐷𝐵𝐸 = ∡𝐷𝐴𝐶 = ∡𝐷𝐴𝐵
Figure 10.
a. The triangles 𝐵𝐸𝐷, 𝐴𝐵𝐷 and 𝐴𝐶𝐸 are similar as they have the same angle
measures, so:
𝐴𝐷 𝐴𝐵
=
𝐵𝐷 𝐵𝐸
b. due to Euclid’s theorem:
𝐶𝐸 𝐴𝐶
=
𝐵𝐸 𝐴𝐵
11
c. by properties of proportions:
𝐶𝐸+𝐵𝐸 𝐴𝐶+𝐴𝐵 𝐴𝐵
𝐵𝐸
=
𝐴𝐵
/ × (𝐶𝐸+𝐵𝐸 )
𝐴𝐵 𝐴𝐶 + 𝐴𝐵
=
𝐵𝐸 𝐶𝐸 + 𝐵𝐸
𝐴𝐷 𝐴𝐶 + 𝐴𝐵 𝐴𝐶 + 𝐴𝐵 𝐴𝐶 𝐴𝐵
= = = +
𝐵𝐷 𝐶𝐸 + 𝐵𝐸 𝐵𝐶 𝐵𝐶 𝐵𝐶
d. due to the relationships in a triangle with angles 30°, 60°, 90°:
𝐴𝐵 2
=
𝐵𝐶 1
e. so:
𝐴𝐷 1351 2911
< +2=
𝐵𝐷 780 780
f. by Pythagoras’ theorem:
𝐴𝐷2 + 𝐵𝐷2 = 𝐴𝐵 2 / ÷ (𝐵𝐷2)

𝐴𝐷2 𝐴𝐵 2
+1=
𝐵𝐷2 𝐵𝐷2
𝐴𝐵 2 29112 9082321
2
< 2
+1=
𝐵𝐷 780 7802
3
𝐴𝐵 3013 4
<
𝐵𝐷 780
12
III. Let 𝐴𝐹 bisect the angle 𝐵𝐴𝐷, meeting the circle in 𝐹; and let 𝐵𝐹 be joined as on
the Figure 11.:
Figure 11.
By following the analogous steps as above:
9
𝐴𝐵 1838 11
<
𝐵𝐹 240
IV. Let 𝐴𝐻 bisect angle 𝐵𝐴𝐹, meeting circle in 𝐻; and let 𝐵𝐻 be joined
(Figure 12.):
Figure 12.
Here:
1
𝐴𝐵 1009 6
<
𝐵𝐻 66
13
V. Let 𝐴𝐽 bisect angle 𝐵𝐴𝐻, meeting circle in 𝐽; and let 𝐵𝐽 be joined (Figure 13.):
Figure 13.
Figure 14. presents the zoomed area,
as the figure above is not clear enough.
Figure 14.
Here:
1
𝐴𝐽 2017 4
<
𝐵𝐽 66
However, for the proof more important is:
𝐵𝐽 66
>
𝐴𝐽 2017 1
4
14
1
VI. The angle 𝐵𝐴𝐷 was bisected four times so angle 𝐵𝐴𝐽 is of right angle. So,
96
following the law which says that an inscribed angle 𝛼 is half of the central angle
1
2𝛼, angle 𝐵𝑂𝐽 is of right angle. Hence, 𝐵𝐽 is the side of the regular 96-sided
48
polygon.
By comparing the polygon to a circle, it is assumed that its perimeter divided by
its diagonal is approximately equal to 𝜋:
1
𝑃 96𝐵𝐽 96 × 66 6336 284
𝜋> = > = =3 4 > 3 10
𝑑 𝐴𝐵 1 1 1 71
2017 2017 2017
4 4 4
So, finally:
10 1
3 <𝜋<3
71 7
It is definitely interesting to look at the problem from an ancient perspective as it differs
much from today’s point of view – mathematics then was in huge part based on
geometry. Geometry was used to proof almost every proposition. However, following
these proofs is a really tedious task and so is with Archimedes’ method. But this is not
the only way of applying his idea. There are many modern variations of this approach
which are much easier and shorter than original one. One of them is as follows7:
7
The process presented was analysed with the help from:
Math Easy Solutions. 25/10/2012. Pi = 3.1415 Proof: Archimedes' Geometric Proof (video). Retrieved 05/10/2018
from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj-u8qXdmJA
15
Let 𝜃 be the interior angle of regular polygon inscribed in a circle (with side 𝑎, diagonal
𝑑𝑖𝑛 and perimeter 𝑃𝑖𝑛 ) and circumscribed on a circle (with side 𝑏, diagonal 𝑑𝑐 and
perimeter 𝑃𝑐 ); and let 𝑛 be the number of sides of both polygons. Radius 𝑟 of the circle
is equal to 1. This is shown on Figure 15.
Firstly, we take the inscribed polygon:
𝑎 𝜃
= sin
2𝑟 2
𝑎 𝜃
as r = 1: = sin
2 2
𝜃 360°
𝑎 = 2sin and 𝜃 =
2 𝑛
180°
𝑎 = 2sin
𝑛
180°
𝑃𝑖𝑛 = 2𝑛 sin
𝑛 Figure 15.
180°
𝑃𝑖𝑛 2𝑛 sin 𝑛 180°
𝜋> = = 𝑛 sin
𝑑𝑖𝑛 2𝑟 𝑛
Secondly – the circumscribed polygon:
𝑏 𝜃 180°
= tan 𝑏 = 2tan
2𝑟 2 𝑛
𝑏 𝜃 180°
𝑎𝑠 𝑟 = 1: = tan 𝑃𝑐 = 2𝑛 tan
2 2 𝑛
𝜃 360°
𝑏 = 2tan and 𝜃 =
2 𝑛
16
180°
𝑃𝑐 2𝑛 tan 𝑛 180°
𝜋< = = 𝑛 tan
𝑑𝑐 2𝑟 𝑛
So:
180° 180°
𝑛 sin < 𝜋 < 𝑛 tan
𝑛 𝑛
Average 𝜋 for Archimedes’ approximation is equal to about 3.14185 – all of the
approximations of roots used to obtain this number were so good that they only caused
the difference on 5th decimal place in comparison to more accurate solution presented
below in the Table 1. for 96-sided polygons (3.14187). This method is a very nice
example to show how basic geometry and trigonometry can be used to find 𝜋.
𝒏 𝜽° 𝒂 𝒃 𝑷𝒊𝒏 𝑷𝒄 𝝅 ≥ 𝑷𝒊𝒏 𝝅 ≤ 𝑷𝒄 𝝅𝒂𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒂𝒈𝒆

6 60 1 1.1547005 6 6.928203 3 3.4641015 3.2320508
12 30 0.5176381 0.5358984 6.2116572 6.430781 3.1058286 3.2153904 3.1606095
24 15 0.2610524 0.263305 6.2652576 6.31932 3.1326288 3.15966 3.1461444
48 7.5 0.1308063 0.1310869 6.2787024 6.292171 3.1393512 3.1460856 3.1427184
96 3.75 0.0654382 0.0654732 6.2820672 6.285427 3.1410336 3.1427136 3.1418736
192 1.875 0.0327235 0.0327278 6.282912 6.283738 3.141456 3.1418688 3.1416624
384 0.9375 0.0163623 0.0163628 6.2831232 6.283315 3.1415616 3.1416576 3.1416096
768 0.46875 0.0081812 0.0081813 6.2831616 6.283238 3.1415808 3.1416192 3.1416
1536 0.234375 0.0040906 0.0040906 6.2831616 6.283162 3.1415808 3.1415808 3.1415808
3072 0.1171875 0.0020453 0.0020453 6.2831616 6.283162 3.1415808 3.1415808 3.1415808
6144 0.0585938 0.0010227 0.0010227 6.2834688 6.283469 3.1417344 3.1417344 3.1417344
12288 0.0292969 0.0005113 0.0005113 6.2828544 6.282854 3.1414272 3.1414272 3.1414272
24576 0.0146485 0.0002557 0.0002557 6.2840832 6.284083 3.1420416 3.1420416 3.1420416
49152 0.0073243 0.0001278 0.0001278 6.2816256 6.281626 3.1408128 3.1408128 3.1408128
Table 1. Approximations of 𝜋 and intermediate steps due to second method analysed.
17
Buffon's Needle Method
Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon was not mainly known for his mathematical
achievements. It was natural history that was his main passion and brought him fame.
However, one of his contributions to the development of science was the first
mathematical problem in geometrical probability that he posed in 18 th century. The
question was: Suppose we have a floor made of parallel strips of wood, each the same
width 𝑡, and we drop a needle of length 𝑙 onto the floor. What is the probability that the
needle will lie across a line between two strips?8 (see Figure 16.)
Figure 16.
8en.wikipedia.org. Buffon's needle problem. Retrieved 11/10/2018 from

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffon%27s_needle_problem
18
Originally it was not destined for calculating the approximation of 𝜋, but, as it occurs,
the answer includes this number. There are two cases that should be considered: when
needle is longer than the length of the strips and when it is shorter or equal to it. Despite
the answer for the first case includes 𝜋, it is much more complex than for the second
case – the answer would require a lot of transformations to obtain only 𝜋. However,
when the needle is short finding 𝜋 is much easier. This is a method that I would like to
focus on here. 9 Every needle will fall with the same probability of crossing a line. The
probability can be understood as the ratio of needles that crossed a line to those who
did not when tossing some number of needles. Now, the question is: what is this ratio?
Each of the needles can fall in completely different directions and positions and at
various angles. The scheme presenting it is shown on the Figure 17.:
Figure 17.
9The process presented was analysed with the help from: MindYourDecisions. 13/03/2016. Counter-Intuitive
Probability: Buffon's Needle Problem. Pi (π) From Probability! (video). Retrieved 25/10/2018 from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szUH1rzwbAw
19
We need to focus on the middle point of the needle, on the vertical distance 𝑑 from the
centre of the needle to closest gap between strips and, on the angle 𝜃 between the
half of the needle with the tip closest to the gap and a line going through the centre of
needle parallel to the gap and distance 𝑥 from the tip to the parallel line, where
𝑡 𝜋
0 ≤ 𝑑 ≤ 2 and 𝜃 ≤ 2 .
This is where 𝜋 is “hidden” - in the rotation, in the radian measure of the angle.
Figure 18.
The condition that must be fulfilled for a needle to cross the line is:
𝑑≤𝑥
as:
𝑥
sin 𝜃 =
𝑙
2
𝑙
𝑥 = sin 𝜃
2
so:
𝑙
𝑑≤ sin 𝜃
2
20
which is visualised on the Figure 19.:
Figure 19.
where red lines represent maximum possible values of 𝑑 and 𝜃.
𝑙 𝜋
The area 𝐴1 under the curve 2 sin 𝜃 for 𝑥 ∈ [0, 2 ] represents the needles that crossed a
𝜋
line between strips and area 𝐴2 under 𝑑 for 𝑥 ∈ [0, 2 ] represents all needles dropped.
The probability 𝑃 of throwing a needle so that it crosses the line is equal to:
𝐴1
𝑃=
𝐴2
𝐴2 is a rectangle with sides 𝑎 and 𝑏 which area can be calculated by using the formula:
𝑡 𝜋 𝜋𝑡
𝐴2 = 𝑎𝑏 = × =
2 2 4
21
𝐴1 may be obtained by using a definite integral.
As the formula for calculating a definite integral is:

𝑏
∫ 𝑓(𝑥)𝑑𝑥 = 𝑔(𝑏) − 𝑔(𝑎)
𝑎
where:
𝑎 – the lower boundary 𝑔(𝑏) – antiderivative of 𝑓(𝑥) for 𝑥 = 𝑏
𝑏 – the upper boundary 𝑔(𝑎) – antiderivative of 𝑓(𝑥) for 𝑥 = 𝑎
𝑑𝑥 – increase in 𝑥
For the data we have:

𝜋
2 𝑙 𝑙 𝜋 𝑙 𝑙 𝑙
∫ sin 𝜃 𝑑𝜃 = − cos ( ) − (− cos 0) = 0 + =
0 2 2 2 2 2 2
Now coming back to the formula:
𝐴1
𝑃=
𝐴2
𝑙 𝜋
where 𝐴1 = 2 and 𝐴2 = 2
𝑙
2 2𝑙
𝑃 = 𝜋𝑡 =
𝜋𝑡
4
2𝑙
It means that the ratio of needles that crossed a line to their total number is , so the
𝜋𝑡
number of all needles divided by the number of the ones that crossed a line is equal to
𝜋𝑡
. Obtaining 𝜋 is even simpler if you take needles whose length is exactly half the
2𝑙
length of a strip you can get 𝜋:
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝜋𝑡

= =𝜋
𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑡 𝑐𝑟𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑎 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒 2 × 𝑡
2
22
It is important to underline that this method is not very effective as it relies on
randomness – it means that in order to get a good approximation of 𝜋 one has to use
a lot of needles. For example, Mario Lazzarini, an Italian mathematician, tossed a

5
needle with length 6 of the distance between lines as many as 3408 times and got the
355
approximation 113 (accurate to 6 decimal places).
1
I also performed this experiment. I dropped 141 toothpicks with lengths of the
2
distance between the lines on a sheet of paper 4 times, and my results are shown in
the Table 2.:
all toothpicks toothpicks that crossed line approximation of 𝜋

141 46 3.065217
141 50 2.82
141 40 3.525
141 42 3.357143
Table 2.
The outcomes certainly are not what one would call good approximations, but with this
number of toothpicks they are satisfactory. Although the method is not as efficient as
many other ones, it is definitely one of the most intriguing because it proves that 𝜋 can
be found even in places where almost no one would expect it to be.
23
Gregory-Leibniz Series
This method is quite interesting for this investigation as it uses geometry, trigonometry,
calculus and series. It was proposed and proved by James Gregory and Gottfried
Leibniz in 17th century. This is the series:
𝜋 1 1 1 1
= 1− + − + −⋯
4 3 5 7 9
In Europe it was known as another method that used infinite series to approximate 𝜋,
but, in fact, it is first such a method. It is important to say that Gregory and Leibniz were
not the first ones to use this idea, it was an Indian mathematician Madhava of
Sangamagrama who discovered it in 14th century. He stated that:
𝑥3 𝑥5 𝑥7 𝑥9
tan−1 𝑥 = 𝑥 − + − + −⋯
3 5 7 9
Leibniz and Gregory rediscovered it and to obtain 𝜋 they substituted 1 for 𝑥.10 In this
work I will use Leibniz’s proof and more modern one to show how the series can be
found11.
In Leibniz’s proof we start with a quarter of a circle

𝜋
with radius 𝑟 equal to 1 and area 𝑅 equal to .
4
Through almost whole process we will focus on
an area 𝑆 of a segment 𝐴𝑀𝑁𝑂𝑃𝑄𝑅𝐶 bounded by
the chord 𝐴𝐶 as it is where infinite series and
integrals will be needed (see Figure 20.). Notice
Figure 20.
10en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 03/11/2018 from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Infinite_series

11 The process presented was analysed with the help from: proofwiki.org. Leibniz's Formula for Pi. Retrieved
02/11/2018 from: https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Leibniz's_Formula_for_Pi
24
that this area may be calculated by adding all of the smaller segments originating from
point 𝐴.
Now, we have to consider one of these
segments – for example 𝐴𝑂𝑃. Notice
that if distance from 𝑂 to 𝑃 tends to
zero, the arc 𝑂𝑃 may be approximated
by the straight line 𝑑𝑠 = 𝑂𝑃. So, the
area 𝐴𝑂𝑃 may be treated as a triangle
(see Figure 21.).
Figure 21.
To calculate the area of the triangle an altitude 𝐴𝐾 must be added (Figure 22.):
𝐴𝐾 × 𝑑𝑠
𝐴△𝐴𝑂𝑃 =
2
Figure 22.
25
Then, another observation is that △
𝐾𝐴𝐿 is similar to △𝑂𝐼𝑃.
To see this better we need to draw a
supplementary right-angled △ 𝐿𝑅𝑃,
then notice that ∡𝐾𝐿𝐴 and ∡𝑅𝐿𝑃 are
vertical angles and have equal
measures, hence △ 𝐾𝐴𝐿 is similar to △
𝐿𝑅𝑃. Then, as 𝑅𝑃 is parallel to 𝑂𝐼,
alternate angles ∡𝑅𝑃𝑂 and ∡𝑃𝑂𝐼 have
equal measures, therefore
△ 𝐿𝑅𝑃 and △ 𝑂𝐼𝑃 are similar. So, △
𝐾𝐿𝐴 and △ 𝑂𝐼𝑃 are similar. And we set
𝑦 as 𝐴𝐿, 𝑥 as a horizontal coordinate of

Figure 23.
𝑂 and 𝑑𝑥 as 𝑂𝐼 (see Figure 23.)
Thus:
𝑑𝑠 𝐴𝐿
= ⇔ 𝐴𝐾 × 𝑑𝑠 = 𝐴𝐿 × 𝑑𝑥
𝑑𝑥 𝐴𝐾
So:
𝐴𝐿 × 𝑑𝑥 𝑦𝑑𝑥
𝑑𝑆 = 𝐴△𝐴𝑂𝑃 = =
2 2
The fact that area 𝑆 consists of triangles with areas 𝑑𝑆 where 𝑑𝑥 tends to zero and 𝑥
have values from 0 to 1 can be presented as an integral:

1
𝑦
𝑆 = ∫ 𝑑𝑆 = ∫ 𝑑𝑥
0 2
26
Now, by integration by parts:

1
𝑦 1 1 𝑢 = 𝑦 𝑣′ = 1 1 1
1 1 1 1
𝑥
∫ 𝑑𝑥 = ∫ (𝑦 × 1) 𝑑𝑥 = | ′ | = [𝑥𝑦]0 − ∫ 𝑥 𝑑𝑦 = − ∫ 𝑑𝑦
0 2 2 0 𝑢 =1𝑣=𝑥 2 2 0 2 0 2
Limits of the integral do not change as 𝑦 also may have values from 0 to 1.
The next step is to notice that as 𝑑𝑠
tends to zero ∡𝐿𝐵𝑃 may be

𝜑
approximated as . It is so because △
2
𝐿𝐴𝐵 and △ 𝐿𝐵𝑂 are similar – they share
one side (𝐿𝐵), each has a side equal to
𝑟 and they both are right-angled (△ 𝐿𝐵𝑂
is right-angled as side 𝐿𝑂 is a tangent to

𝜋
the semi-circle at 𝑂 so ∡𝐿𝑂𝐵 = 2 ) – see
Figure 24. Figure 24.
From trigonometry (as 𝑟 = 1):
𝑦 𝜑
= 𝑦 = tan
𝑟 2
And:
𝑟−𝑥
= 1 − 𝑥 = cos 𝜑
𝑟
𝜑 𝜑
𝑥 = 1 − cos 𝜑 = 1 − (1 − 2 sin2 ) = 2 sin2
2 2
So:
2𝜑
2
𝜑 sin 2
2 2
𝜑 2
𝜑 2
𝜑 2
𝜑 𝑥
𝑦 = tan = = sin sec = sin (1 + tan ) = (1 + 𝑦 2 )
2 cos2 𝜑 2 2 2 2 2
2
27
𝑥 𝑦2
=
2 1 + 𝑦2
Now we notice that the right-hand side of the equation can be written as a sum of an
infinite geometric sequence 𝑆∞ , due to formula:
𝑢1
𝑆∞ =
1−𝑞
where 𝑢1 is the first term of the sequence and 𝑞 is the common ratio.
The 𝑛-th term of the sequence 𝑢𝑛 is defined as:
𝑢𝑛 = 𝑢1 𝑞 𝑛−1
So:
𝑦2
= 𝑦 2 (−𝑦 2 )0 + 𝑦 2 (−𝑦 2 )1 + 𝑦 2 (−𝑦 2 )2 + 𝑦 2 (−𝑦 2 )3 + ⋯ = 𝑦 2 − 𝑦 4 + 𝑦 6 − 𝑦 8 + ⋯
1 + 𝑦2
Hence:
1 1 1
1 𝑥 1 𝑦2 1
𝑆 = − ∫ 𝑑𝑦 = − ∫ 2
𝑑𝑦 = − ∫ (𝑦 2 − 𝑦 4 + 𝑦 6 − 𝑦 8 + ⋯ ) 𝑑𝑦 =
2 0 2 2 0 1+𝑦 2 0
1
1 𝑦3 𝑦5 𝑦7 𝑦9 1 1 1 1 1
= −[ − + − +⋯] = −( − + − +⋯) =
2 3 5 7 9 0
2 3 5 7 9
1 1 1 1 1
= − + − + −⋯
2 3 5 7 9
𝜋
Finally, to obtain the area of the quadrant (𝑅 = 4 ) we need to add the area of the
segment 𝐴𝑀𝑁𝑂𝑃𝑄𝑅𝐶 (𝑆) to the area of △ 𝐴𝐵𝐶 (𝐴△ ).
𝑟×𝑟 1
𝐴△ = =
2 2
So:
𝜋 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
= + − + − + −⋯=1− + − + −⋯
4 2 2 3 5 7 9 3 5 7 9
28
Hence:
4 4 4 4
𝜋 = 4− + − + −⋯
3 5 7 9
Nowadays, there are of course much simpler and less tedious ways to prove that series
is true. They are not based on geometrical observations but completely on calculus. I
will present here one of the most basic proofs.
Firstly, we have to note that:
1 2 4 6 4𝑛
𝑡 4𝑛+2
= 1 −𝑡 + 𝑡 − 𝑡 + ⋯+ 𝑡 −
1 + 𝑡2 1 + 𝑡2
Series 1 − 𝑡 2 + 𝑡 4 − 𝑡 6 + ⋯ + 𝑡 4𝑛 is geometric series with common ratio (−𝑡 2 ) and due
to the sum of geometric sequence:

2𝑛
2 4 6 4𝑛
1 − (−𝑡 2 )2𝑛+1 1 + (𝑡 2 )2𝑛+1
1 − 𝑡 +𝑡 − 𝑡 + ⋯+ 𝑡 = ∑(−𝑡 2 )𝑘 = = =
1 − (−𝑡 2 ) 1 + 𝑡2
𝑘=0
1 𝑡 4𝑛+2
= +
1 + 𝑡2 1 + 𝑡2
So:
1 2 4 6 4𝑛
𝑡 4𝑛+2
= 1 −𝑡 + 𝑡 − 𝑡 + ⋯+ 𝑡 −
1 + 𝑡2 1 + 𝑡2
As this relation is proven we consider the non-negative number 𝑥 ≤ 1 and integrate
expression above with respect to 𝑡 from 0 to 𝑥:

𝑥 𝑥 𝑥
1 𝑡3 𝑡5 𝑡7 𝑡 4𝑛+1 𝑡 4𝑛+2
∫ 𝑑𝑡 = [𝑡 − + − + ⋯ + ] −∫ 𝑑𝑡 =
1 + 𝑡2 3 5 7 4𝑛 + 1 0 1 + 𝑡2
0 0
𝑥
𝑥3 𝑥5 𝑥7 𝑥 4𝑛+1 𝑡 4𝑛+2
= 𝑥 − + − + ⋯+ −∫ 𝑑𝑡
3 5 7 4𝑛 + 1 1 + 𝑡2
0
Now notice that for real numbers:
𝑡2 ≥ 0
29
So:
1 ≤ 1 + 𝑡2
Hence:
𝑡 4𝑛+2
0≤ ≤ 𝑡 4𝑛+2
1 + 𝑡2
And for functions closed by the same boundaries on 𝑥-axis 𝑎 and 𝑏 where 𝑎 < 𝑏:
𝑥 𝑥
𝑡 4𝑛+2
0≤∫ 𝑑𝑡 ≤ ∫ 𝑡 4𝑛+2 𝑑𝑡
1 + 𝑡2
0 0
𝑥
𝑡 4𝑛+2 𝑥 4𝑛+3
0≤∫ 𝑑𝑡 ≤
1 + 𝑡2 4𝑛 + 3
0
As 0 ≤ 𝑥 ≤ 1:
𝑥 4𝑛+3 1
≤
4𝑛 + 3 4𝑛 + 3
So:
𝑥
𝑡 4𝑛+2 1
0≤∫ 𝑑𝑡 ≤
1 + 𝑡2 4𝑛 + 3
0
Notice that:
1
lim =0
𝑛→∞ 4𝑛 + 3
Therefore:
𝑥
𝑡 4𝑛+2
lim ∫ 𝑑𝑡 = 0
𝑛→∞ 1 + 𝑡2
0
And:
𝑥 4𝑛+3
lim =0
𝑛→∞ 4𝑛 + 3
30
Hence:
𝑥
1 𝑥3 𝑥5 𝑥7
∫ 𝑑𝑡 = 𝑥 − + − +⋯
1 + 𝑡2 3 5 7
0
Note that:
𝑥
1
tan−1 𝑥 = ∫ 𝑑𝑡
1 + 𝑡2
0
So:
−1
𝑥3 𝑥5 𝑥7
tan 𝑥 =𝑥− + − +⋯
3 5 7
However, the convergence of this series is very slow which means that one needs to
use many terms to get the result (after adding 500,000 terms the approximation is
accurate only to 5 decimal places12). There are many series and products found not
only in 17th century with much faster convergence. However, this one is not only the
first but also one of the simplest which for sure is its advantage.
One of the other series that converges very rapidly to 𝜋 is Nilakantha’s series published
in 15th century13:
4 4 4
𝜋 =3+ − + −⋯
2×3×4 4×5×6 6×7×8
And product with similar convergence to Gregory-Leibniz series is the one discovered
in 1655 by John Wallis14:
𝜋 2 2 4 4 6
= × × × × ×…
2 1 3 3 5 5
12 http://www.pi314.net. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 - 1716). Retrieved 14/12/2018 from:

http://www.pi314.net/eng/leibniz.php
13 en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 05/03/19 from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
14 en.wikipedia.org. Wallis product. Retrieved 05/03/19 from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallis_product
31
Table 3. presents the comparison of convergences of Leibniz’s and Gregory’s series
to those of others:
infinite series/product after 1st after 2nd after 3rd after 4th after 5th
term term term term term
4 4 4 4 4 2.6667 3.4667 2.8952 3.3397
4− + − + −⋯
3 5 7 9
2 2 4 4 6 4 2.6667 3.5556 2.8444 3.4133
2( × × × × × …)
1 3 3 5 5
4 4 4 3 3.1667 3.1333 3.1452 3.1397
3+ − + −⋯
2×3×4 4×5×6 6×7×8
Table 3. Comparison of the Gregory-Leibniz series to other series approximating 𝜋
Quite interesting is the fact that you can “improve” Gregory-Leibniz series (make it
converge faster to 𝜋) by:

1
inserting for 𝑥
√3
1 3 1 5
( ) ( )
𝜋 1 1 1 1 1
= tan−1 = − √3 + √3 − ⋯ = (1 − 1
+ −⋯)
6 √3 √3 3 5 √3 3×3 5 × 32
6 1 1
𝜋= (1 − 1
+ −⋯)
√3 3×3 5 × 32
1 1
Or rewriting tan−1 1 as tan−1 2 + tan−1 3 we get15:
1 3 1 51 3 1 5
𝜋 1 1 1 1 ( ) ( (2)
) (2)
= tan−1 1 = tan−1 + tan−1 = ( − + −⋯)+( − 3 + 3 −⋯)
4 2 3 2 3 5 3 3 5
1 1 1 1 1 1
= (1 − + − ⋯ ) + (1 − + −⋯)
2 3 × 22 5 × 24 3 3 × 32 5 × 34
1 1 4 1 1
𝜋 = 2 (1 − 2
+ 4
− ⋯ ) + (1 − 2
+ −⋯)
3×2 5×2 3 3×3 5 × 34
15
crypto.stanford.edu. The Gregory-Leibniz Series. Retrieved 15/12/2018 from
https://crypto.stanford.edu/pbc/notes/pi/glseries.html
32
This can be seen below in the Table 4.
infinite series after 1st after 2nd after 3rd after 4th after 5th
term term term term term
4 4 4 4 4 2.6667 3.4667 2.8952 3.3397
4− + − + −⋯
3 5 7 9
6 1 1 3.4641 3.0792 3.1562 3.1379 3.1426

(1 − 1
+ − ⋯)
√3 3×3 5 × 32
1 1 4 1 1 3.3333 3.1173 3.1456 3.1401 3.1417

2 (1 − 2
+ 4
− ⋯ ) + (1 − 2
+ − ⋯)
3×2 5×2 3 3×3 5 × 34
Table 4. Comparison of different versions of Gregory-Leibniz series.
Conclusion
There are many methods of finding an approximation of 𝜋 that vary throughout times
and places. The ones presented here are just a small fraction of the vast gathering of
approaches to the topic as almost every great mathematician at least once in his life
came up with his own solution. These ideas were usually completely diverse and
employed different tools (in case of Archimedes it was geometry, but Georges-Louis
Leclerc unexpectedly used probability), but on the other hand sometimes scientists
from sundry countries and ages discovered the same method without knowing that
they were not first (as with three “finders” of Gregory-Leibniz series).
Moreover, the fact that 𝜋 was explored by so many scholars (as if it was a matter of
honour to find the number) underlines its importance and constitutes it as a certain
symbol. Nowadays, NASA needs the approximation of 𝜋 accurate to 15 decimal places
for interplanetary navigations16 and such approximation was found in 15th century by a
16 www.jpl.nasa.gov. How Many Decimals of Pi Do We Really Need? Retrieved 06/02/2018 from:

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/news/2016/3/16/how-many-decimals-of-pi-do-we-really-need/
33
Persian astronomer.17 So, if it is enough now and it was certainly enough then, why
mathematicians did not stop? The reason for that is not the need for accuracy but the
need for pushing the limits. This number is unpredictable therefore finding a pattern in
it and its connections with different branches of mathematics is a thrilling challenge for
enthusiasts who in its seeming chaos see beauty.
17 en.wikipedia.org. Approximations of π. Retrieved 06/02/2018 from:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approximations_of_%CF%80
34
Bibliography
1 en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 06/01/2019 from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
2 en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 30/05/2018 from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Antiquity
3 en.wikipedia.org. Method of exhaustion. Retrieved 30/05/2018 from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Method_of_exhaustion
4 The process presented in the work is performed with the use of materials from:
Archimedes' Approximation of Pi, retrieved on 30/06/18, 12/07/18, 20/07/18,

08/08/18, 13/08/18, 11/09/18 from:
https://itech.fgcu.edu/faculty/clindsey/mhf4404/archimedes/archimedes.html
5 www.britannica.com. Archimedes. Retrieved 01/07/18 from:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Archimedes#ref383383
6 proofwiki.org. Angle Bisector Theorem. Retrieved 11/07/2018 from
https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Angle_Bisector_Theorem
7 The process presented was analysed with the help from:
Math Easy Solutions. 25/10/2012. Pi = 3.1415 Proof: Archimedes' Geometric Proof

(video). Retrieved 05/10/2018 from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj-u8qXdmJA
8 en.wikipedia.org. Buffon's needle problem. Retrieved 11/10/2018 from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffon%27s_needle_problem
9 The process presented was analysed with the help from: MindYourDecisions.
13/03/2016. Counter-Intuitive Probability: Buffon's Needle Problem. Pi (π) From

Probability! (video). Retrieved 25/10/2018 from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szUH1rzwbAw
10 en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 03/11/2018 from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi#Infinite_series
11 The process presented was analysed with the help from: proofwiki.org. Leibniz's
Formula for Pi. Retrieved 02/11/2018 from:

https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Leibniz's_Formula_for_Pi
12 http://www.pi314.net. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646 - 1716). Retrieved
14/12/2018 from: http://www.pi314.net/eng/leibniz.php

13 en.wikipedia.org. Pi. Retrieved 05/03/19 from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi
14 en.wikipedia.org. Wallis product. Retrieved 05/03/19 from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallis_product
15 crypto.stanford.edu. The Gregory-Leibniz Series. Retrieved 15/12/2018 from
https://crypto.stanford.edu/pbc/notes/pi/glseries.html
16 www.jpl.nasa.gov. How Many Decimals of Pi Do We Really Need? Retrieved
06/02/2018 from: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/edu/news/2016/3/16/how-many-decimals-

of-pi-do-we-really-need/
17 en.wikipedia.org. Approximations of π. Retrieved 06/02/2018 from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approximations_of_%CF%80
35

EE Hard PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

EE Hard PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EE Hard PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Extended Essay

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

How can an approximation of π be obtained within

Candidate’s name: Alicja Kuderska

Supervisor’s name: Marcin Borowiak

Word count: 3580

Session: May 2019

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

Buffon's Needle Method……………………………………………………………………18

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

theory, statistics, etc.) but also in physics (mechanics, electromagnetism,

thermodynamics, etc.). Moreover, dividing the value of a circumference by diameter

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

when mathematicians started to use infinite series)2. It is quite astonishing, especially

included in this work.

It is an example of “a method of exhaustion” – method common among the ancient

the circumference as number of sides of a polygon tends to infinity.

The method is based on approximating 𝜋 by using the perimeters of regular polygons

circumscribed and inscribed in a circle and obtaining a formula for perimeter of a

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

Firstly, he worked on the perimeter of a circumscribed polygon.

I. He set 𝐴𝐵 as the diameter of any circle, 𝑂 as its center, 𝐴𝐶 as the tangent at 𝐴

a right angle (see Figure 2.).

90°, we know that:

approximations of square roots, however, the possible method will not be

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

𝐷 is vertex of a regular dodecagon) as on the Figure 3.:

triangle […]”6 (see

6proofwiki.org. Angle Bisector Theorem. Retrieved 11/07/2018 from

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

b. so, by properties of proportions:

𝑂𝐴 𝐶𝑂 𝑂𝐴 306 265 571

(analogous approximations will be used further when applying Pythagoras’ theorem)

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

regular 24-sided polygon) as on the Figure 5.:

By following the analogous steps as above:

regular 48-sided polygon) as on the Figure 6.:

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

𝐴𝑂𝐹 and meet 𝐴𝐹 in 𝐺 (where 𝐺 is the vertex of a regular 96-sided polygon) as

In this case Pythagoras’ theorem is not used but by properties of proportions:

circumscribed on a circle (see Figure 8.)

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

diagonal is approximately equal to 𝜋:

upper limit of the approximation of 𝜋 could be found.

and the diagonal of 96-sided polygon inscribed in the circle.

right angle as on the Figure 9.:

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

analogous reason as before.

∡𝐷𝐵𝐸 = ∡𝐴𝐵𝐷 − ∡𝐴𝐵𝐸 = 75° − 60° = 15°

∡𝐷𝐵𝐸 = ∡𝐷𝐴𝐶 = ∡𝐷𝐴𝐵

b. due to Euclid’s theorem:

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

d. due to the relationships in a triangle with angles 30°, 60°, 90°:

𝐴𝐷2 + 𝐵𝐷2 = 𝐴𝐵 2 / ÷ (𝐵𝐷2)

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π

the Figure 11.:

Different ways of obtaining an approximation of π