ON “SOLVING THE NON-EUCLIDEAN

UNIFORM CIRCULAR MOTION

PROBLEM BY NEWTON’S IMPACT
METHOD”
AND ON THE
“SOLUTION OF THE DIRECT PROBLEM
OF UNIFORM CIRCULAR MOTION IN
NON-EUCLIDEAN GEOMETRY”

1
 The author of the above article[1] used Newton’s polygonal approximation method to
derive the centrifugal forces of uniform rotational motion around circles on a hyperbolic
plane of constant curvature, −1, and a circle in the elliptic plane of curvature, +1.
In a previous publication[2], Lamphere found that the Euclidean result,

v2
−m , (1)
r
where m is the mass of the particle, v is the constant, uniform velocity and r is the radius
of the circle, should be replaced by
v2
−m
tanh(r)
in the hyperbolic plane of constant curvature. It would then follow that the centrifugal
acceleration would be
v2
−m (2)
tan(r)
for a sphere of unit radius. This is because hyperbolic and trigonometric functions are
related by tan(r) = −i tanh(ir), it suffices to treat either case. However, both results are
wrong, and it is the purpose of this note to correct them.
To motivate our discussion, let us consider the Newtonian gravitational potential in the
hyperbolic plane of constant curvature. A Lobachevskian straight line is tanh(r), so that
Newton’s potential,
µ
V = ,
tanh(r)
where µ = GM , the gravitational parameter, gives rise to a force

dV µ
=− .
dr sinh2 (r)

The corresponding metric is given by

ds2 = dr2 + sinh2 (r)dϕ2 ,

for polar coordinates (r, ϕ). This replaces the Euclidean metric,

ds2 = dr2 + r2 dϕ2 ,

for which the Newtonian law

dV µ
= − 2,
dr r
in the hyperbolic plane of constant curvature. In fact, the hyperbolic distance between
points (r, ϕ) and (r, ϕ + dϕ) in the hyperbolic plane is

ds = sinh(r)dϕ,

instead of the Euclidean arc length, ds = rdϕ. And instead of the circumference, 2πr, the
hyperbolic circumference of a unit circle is 2π sinh(r), which was first derived by Gauss.

2
 Turning to equation (3) of Lamphere’s paper, the impulse is

f ∆t = −2mv sin θ.

And referring to Figure 1(a) we apply the hyperbolic law of sines to the isosceles triangle
SCB we get
1 2 cos ϕ
= ,
sinh(r) sinh(∆s)
where ϕ is the complement of the angle θ, and we used sin(π − 2ϕ) = 2 sin ϕ cos ϕ. Intro-
ducing this expression into the impulse gives

sinh(∆s)/∆s
f ∆t = −m v∆s.
sinh(r)

And if there are n sides to the polygon, then the total impulse is

sinh(∆s)/∆s
f n∆t = −m vn∆s.
sinh(r)

Letting n → ∞, and both ∆t → 0, and ∆s → 0 such that n∆t = T , and n∆s = L with
L = vT , we come out with the hyperbolic centrifugal force

v2
f = −m ,
sinh(r)

in the hyperbolic plane of constant curvature. Analogously, we have

v2
f −m ,
sin(r)

for the sphere of unit radius in elliptic geometry. In this case, as r → π/2, the magnitude
of the centrifugal force approaches its liming value of mv 2 , instead of vanishing as it would
if (2) were valid, or if the Euclidean result, (1), applied in the limit of r → ∞. Regarding
paper[2], consider Lamphere’s modified Fig. 2 Let the secant RL be further inclined so that

Figure 1: Lamphere’s modified Fig.2

point L on the circumference of the circle intersect with the extension of line SP through
the origin. Call the angle α. Now if L, Q, and P are three distinct points on a cirlce, the
line LP is a diameter, then the ∠LQP is a right triangle. This is known as Thales’ theorem,

3
and is proven as part of the 31st proposition in the III rd book of Euclid’s Elements[3].
Thus, 4QP P is also a right triangle. The angles
π
∠LP Q = ∠QRP = − α,
2
since ∠QP Q = α. The sides

RP = vδt (3)
1f
QR = (δt)2 . (4)
3m
Applying the law of sines to 4LRP ,

sin α 1 cos α
= = .
sin(RP ) sin(LR) sin(LP )

The last equality gives

sin(LP )
cos α = . (5)
sin(RP )
Now, applying the law of sines to the second right triangle 4RQP , we get

sin α 1
= .
sin(QR) sin(RP )

Eliminating sin α between the two sets of expressions gives

sin(QR) × sin(RL) = sin2 (RP ),

which is none other than the elliptic form of the Euclidean formula

RQ × LQ = RP 2 ,

that Newton used to derive his expression for the centrifugal force.
Introducing (3) and (4) into the elliptic form of the tangent-secant law, and letting α → 1
in (5) gives
sin2 (vδt)
 
1f 2
sin (δt) = , (6)
2m 2 sin(r)
where we introduced the radius r = SP of an elliptic circle of circumference 2π sin(r). The
same limit
lim sin(x)
x→0 = 1,
x
will also work for tan(x) as Lamphere used. Thus, he should have obtained

mv 2
f= ,
sin(r)

for elliptic geometry, and not with tan(r)[2]. Analogous for hyperbolic geometry of constant
curvature the radius becomes imaginary resulting in the centrifugal force law,

mv 2
f= ,
sinh(r)

4
and not with the Lobachevskian ‘straight’ line tanh(r).

5
References
[1] R. L. Lamphere, “Math. mag.” pp. 366–369, 2010.

[2] ——, “Amer. math. monthly,” pp. 650–655, 2002.

[3] T. L. Heath, “The thirteen books of euclid’s elements,” 1908.