Talk:Doubling the cube

WikiProject Mathematics (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Mathematics rating:
 Start Class
 Low Importance
Field: Geometry

Contents

What about links to the other two unsolvable problems? --Paughsw 05:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I have a very very close solution, accurate within 0.000103 of an inch. Directions to the "almost" proof are here: http://www.cut-the-knot.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/ctk.cgi?az=read_count&om=703&forum=DCForumID4&omm=3&viewmode=threaded

Do we want to keep it? While it is a moderately nice little script, it functions as part of the general promotion of Larouche's bizaare claims that the problem is somehow solvable. This is not a good. JoshuaZ 03:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Legend?

For a legend, the Delian story included remarkably precise dates, and lies well within the historical era. It would perhaps be useful to mention the source of the legend, that is to say where it was first recorded as a story. -- Cimon Avaro; on a pogostick. (talk) 05:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote the section and removed the word legend, though really the story could well be called a legend in the "urban legend" sense of the word. The sources I've found give conflicting versions of the tale and speak of forged letters and different people quoting originals that are now lost, but most of them agree that the story is at best implausible. There could be a lot more done in tracing down the history of the story but given that main purpose in including is to explain the name of the problem it's probably best not to go overboard on detail.--RDBury (talk) 05:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Error in solution

Please recheck consrtuction of AG. I got that AG is 2/sqrt(3). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.68.125.105 (talk) 10:28, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I just checked it myself and came out with the cube root of 2 plus it has a citation which gives a proof. I'm not sure how anyone ever thought of the construction though! Dmcq (talk) 12:51, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I concur. Not even checking the result, the argument has obvious faults. Can somebody please reformulate it so it starts making sense?

Vlad Patryshev (talk) 16:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

It isn't an argument. It is a description. I believe the result is correct. What makes you think it is wrong? Dmcq (talk) 20:03, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
In fact if you look up the citation you'll see a proof. Dmcq (talk) 20:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)