Cube root — where it appears
Named by 4 essays across one field — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.
Folding beats the compass, by exactly one degree
Straightedge and compass solve quadratics. A single fold solves cubics. That one-step difference settles two problems Greek geometry could not, and leaves a third exactly as impossible as it was.
The numbers a fold reaches
Folding solves cubics, which is one fact about one fold. The reason the subject has a theory rather than a bag of tricks is a second fact about all of them: the lengths a folder can mark are closed under addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, square roots and cube roots. Constructions can therefore be built out of constructions — and no tower of them ever arrives at a fifth root.
Reachable is not cheap
The closure is what makes folding a theory rather than a bag of tricks: constructions can be built out of constructions. What that also means is that constructions have lengths and the lengths compose, so every reachable number has a height as well as a degree — the number of extension steps the shortest tower to it must take. The two orderings disagree, and a ninth root is a shorter tower than an eighth.
Twos and threes run out
A fold reaches a number exactly when the degree of its equation is a product of twos and threes, which sounds like a large set because it is infinite and because it is so much larger than the compass's. Counted, the reachable degrees are the lattice points under a straight line, so there are about half a log-squared of them: twenty of the first hundred, a hundred and forty-two of the first million. The share falls from a fifth to one part in seven thousand, and the factor by which folding beats the compass rises at every decade without ever settling.
Named alongside it
The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.
Field extensionConstructible numberReachable setClosureOrigami numberThe axiomsCountingCubicNeusisQuadraticTrisection