CHAPTER XV

1. Three iron rods are hinged at the extremities, as shown in this figure. Is the figure rigid? Why?2. Four iron rods are hinged, as shown in this figure. Is the figure rigid? If not, where would you put in the fifth rod to make it rigid? Prove that this would accomplish the result.

1. Three iron rods are hinged at the extremities, as shown in this figure. Is the figure rigid? Why?

2. Four iron rods are hinged, as shown in this figure. Is the figure rigid? If not, where would you put in the fifth rod to make it rigid? Prove that this would accomplish the result.

Another interesting application relates to the most ancient form of leveling instrument known to us. This kind of level is pictured on very ancient monuments, and it is still used in many parts of the world. Pupils in manual training may make such an instrument, and indeed one is easily made out of cardboard.If the plumb line passes through the mid-point of the base, the two triangles are congruent and the plumb line is then perpendicular to the base. In other words, the base is level. With such simple primitive instruments, easily made by pupils, a good deal of practical mathematical work can be performed. The interesting old illustration here given shows how this form of level was used three hundred years ago.

Early Methods of Leveling Pomodoro's "La geometria prattica," Rome, 1624Early Methods of Leveling Pomodoro's "La geometria prattica," Rome, 1624

Teachers who seek for geometric figures in practical mechanics will find this proposition illustrated in the ordinary hoisting apparatus of the kind here shown. From the study of such forms and of simple roof and bridge trusses, a number of the usual properties of the isosceles triangle may be derived.

Theorem.The sum of two lines drawn from a given point to the extremities of a given line is greater than the sum of two other lines similarly drawn, but included by them.

It should be noted that the words "the extremities of" are necessary, for it is possible to draw from a certain point within a certain triangle two lines to the base such that their sum is greater than the sum of the other two sides.

Thus, in the right triangleABCdraw any lineCXfromCto the base. MakeXY=AC, andCP=PY. Then it is easily shown thatPB+PX>CB+CA.It is interesting to a class to have a teacher point out that, in this figure,AP+PB

Thus, in the right triangleABCdraw any lineCXfromCto the base. MakeXY=AC, andCP=PY. Then it is easily shown thatPB+PX>CB+CA.

It is interesting to a class to have a teacher point out that, in this figure,AP+PB

Theorem.Only one perpendicular can be drawn to a given line from a given external point.

Theorem.Two lines drawn from a point in a perpendicular to a given line, cutting off on the given line equal segments from the foot of the perpendicular, are equal and make equal angles with the perpendicular.

Theorem.Of two lines drawn from the same point in a perpendicular to a given line, cutting off on the line unequal segments from the foot of the perpendicular, the more remote is the greater.

Theorem.The perpendicular is the shortest line that can be drawn to a straight line from a given external point.

These four propositions, while known to the ancients and incidentally used, are not explicitly stated by Euclid. The reason seems to be that he interspersed his problems with his theorems, and in his Propositions 11 and 12, which treat of drawing a perpendicular to a line, the essential features of these theorems are proved. Further mention will be made of them when we come to consider the problems in question. Many textbook writers put the second and third of the four before the first, forgetting that the first is assumed in the other two, and hence should precede them.

Theorem.Two right triangles are congruent if the hypotenuse and a side of the one are equal respectively to the hypotenuse and a side of the other.

Theorem.Two right triangles are congruent if the hypotenuse and an adjacent angle of the one are equal respectively to the hypotenuse and an adjacent angle of the other.

As stated in the notes on the third proposition in this sequence, Euclid's cumbersome Proposition 26 covers several cases, and these two among them. Of course this present proposition could more easily be proved after the one concerning the sum of the angles of a triangle, but the proof is so simple that it is better to leave the proposition here in connection with others concerning triangles.

Theorem.Two lines in the same plane perpendicular to the same line cannot meet, however far they are produced.

This proposition is not in Euclid, and it is introduced for educational rather than for mathematical reasons. Euclid introduced the subject by the proposition that, if alternate angles are equal, the lines are parallel. It is, however, simpler to begin with this proposition, and there is some advantage in stating it in such a way as toprove that parallels exist before they are defined. The proposition is properly followed by the definition of parallels and by the postulate that has been discussed onpage 127.

A good application of this proposition is the one concerning a method of drawing parallel lines by the use of a carpenter's square. Here two lines are drawn perpendicular to the edge of a board or a ruler, and these are parallel.

Theorem.If a line is perpendicular to one of two parallel lines, it is perpendicular to the other also.

This, like the preceding proposition, is a special case under a later theorem. It simplifies the treatment of parallels, however, and the beginner finds it easier to approach the difficulties gradually, through these two cases of perpendiculars. It should be noticed that this is an example of a partial converse, as explained onpage 175. The preceding proposition may be stated thus: Ifais ⊥ toxandbis ⊥ tox, thenais || tob. This proposition may be stated thus: Ifais ⊥ toxandais || tob, thenbis ⊥ tox. This is, therefore, a partial converse.

These two propositions having been proved, the usual definitions of the angles made by a transversal of two parallels may be given. It is unfortunate that we have no name for each of the two groups of four equal angles, and the name of "transverse angles" has been suggested. This would simplify the statements of certain other propositions; thus: "If two parallel lines are cut by a transversal, the transverse angles are equal," and this includes two propositions as usually given. There is not as yet, however, any general sanction for the term.

Theorem.If two parallel lines are cut by a transversal, the alternate-interior angles are equal.

Euclid gave this as half of his Proposition 29. Indeed, he gives only four theorems on parallels, as against five propositions and several corollaries in most of our American textbooks. The reason for increasing the number is that each proposition may be less involved. Thus, instead of having one proposition for both exterior and interior angles, modern authors usually have one for the exterior and one for the interior, so as to make the difficult subject of parallels easier for beginners.

Theorem.When two straight lines in the same plane are cut by a transversal, if the alternate-interior angles are equal, the two straight lines are parallel.

This is the converse of the preceding theorem, and is half of Euclid I, 28, his theorem being divided for the reason above stated. There are several typical pairs of equal or supplemental angles that would lead to parallel lines, of which Euclid uses only part, leaving the other cases to be inferred. This accounts for the number of corollaries in this connection in later textbooks.

Surveyors make use of this proposition when they wish, without using a transit instrument, to run one line parallel to another.

For example, suppose two boys are laying out a tennis court and they wish to run a line throughPparallel toAB. Take a 60-foot tape and swing it aroundPuntil the other end rests onAB, as atM. Put a stake atO, 30 feet fromPandM. Then take any convenient pointNonAB, and measureON. Suppose it equals 20 feet. Then sight fromNthroughO, and put a stake atQjust 20 feet fromO. ThenPandQdetermine the parallel, according to the proposition just mentioned.

Theorem.If two parallel lines are cut by a transversal, the exterior-interior angles are equal.

This is also a part of Euclid I, 29. It is usually followed by several corollaries, covering the minor and obvious cases omitted by the older writers. While it would be possible to dispense with these corollaries, they are helpful for definite reference in later propositions.

Theorem.The sum of the three angles of a triangle is equal to two right angles.

Euclid stated this as follows: "In any triangle, if one of the sides be produced, the exterior angle is equal to the two interior and opposite angles, and the three interior angles of the triangle are equal to two right angles." This states more than is necessary for the basal fact of the proposition, which is the constancy of the sum of the angles.

The theorem is one of the three most important propositions in plane geometry, the other two being the so-called Pythagorean Theorem, and a proposition relating to the proportionality of the sides of two triangles. These three form the foundation of trigonometry and of the mensuration of plane figures.

The history of the proposition is extensive. Eutocius (ca.510A.D.), in his commentary on Apollonius, says that Geminus (first centuryB.C.) testified that "the ancients investigated the theorem of the two right angles in each individual species of triangle, first in the equilateral, again in the isosceles, and afterwards in the scalene triangle." This, indeed, was the ancient plan, to proceed from the particular to the general. It is the natural order, it is the world's order, and it is well to follow it in all cases of difficulty in the classroom.

Proclus (410-485A.D.) tells us that Eudemus, who lived just before Euclid (or probably about 325B.C.),affirmed that the theorem was due to the Pythagoreans, although this does not necessarily mean to the actual pupils of Pythagoras. The proof as he gives it consists in showing thata=a´,b=b´, anda´ +c+b´ = two right angles. Since the proposition about the exterior angle of a triangle is attributed to Philippus of Mende (ca.380B.C.), the figure given by Eudemus is probably the one used by the Pythagoreans.

There is also some reason for believing that Thales (ca.600B.C.) knew the theorem, for Diogenes Laertius (ca.200A.D.) quotes Pamphilius (first centuryA.D.) as saying that "he, having learned geometry from the Egyptians, was the first to inscribe a right triangle in a circle, and sacrificed an ox." The proof of this proposition requires the knowledge that the sum of the angles, at least in a right triangle, is two right angles. The proposition is frequently referred to by Aristotle.

There have been numerous attempts to prove the proposition without the use of parallel lines. Of these a German one, first given by Thibaut in the early part of the eighteenth century, is among the most interesting. This, in simplified form, is as follows:

Suppose an indefinite lineXYto lie onAB. Let it swing aboutA, counterclockwise, through ∠A, so as to lie onAC, asX'Y'. Then let it swing aboutC, through ∠C, so as to lie onCB, asX''Y''. Then let it swing aboutB, through ∠B, so as to lie onBA, asX'''Y'''. It now lies onAB,but it is turned over,X'''being whereYwas, andY'''whereXwas. In turning through ⦞A,B, andCit has therefore turned through two right angles.

One trouble with the proof is that the rotation has not been about the same point, so that it has never been looked upon as other than an interesting illustration.

Proclus tried to prove the theorem by saying that, if we have two perpendiculars to the same line, and suppose them to revolve about their feet so as to make a triangle, then the amount taken from the right angles is added to the vertical angle of the triangle, and therefore the sum of the angles continues to be two right angles. But, of course, to prove his statement requires a perpendicular to be drawn from the vertex to the base, and the theorem of parallels to be applied.

Pupils will find it interesting to cut off the corners of a paper triangle and fit the angles together so as to make a straight angle.

This theorem furnishes an opportunity for many interesting exercises, and in particular for determining the third angle when two angles of a triangle are given, or the second acute angle of a right triangle when one acute angle is given.

Of the simple outdoor applications of the proposition, one of the best is illustrated in this figure.

To ascertain the height of a tree or of the school building, fold a piece of paper so as to make an angle of 45°. Then walk back from the tree until the top is seen at an angle of 45° with the ground (being therefore careful to have the base of the triangle level). Then the heightACwill equal the baseAB, sinceABCis isosceles. A paper protractor may be used for the same purpose.

Distances can easily be measured by constructing a large equilateral triangle of heavy pasteboard, and standing pins at the vertices for the purpose of sighting.

To measurePC, stand at some convenient pointAand sight alongAPCand also alongAB. Then walk alongABuntil a pointBis reached from whichBCmakes withBAan angle of the triangle (60°). ThenAC=AB, and sinceAPcan be measured, we can findPC.

Another simple method of measuring a distanceACacross a stream is shown in this figure.

Measure the angleCAX, either in degrees, with a protractor, or by sighting along a piece of paper and marking down the angle. Then go alongXAproduced until a pointBis reached from whichBCmakes withAan angle equal to half of angleCAX. Then it is easily shown thatAB=AC.

A navigator uses the same principle when he "doubles the angle on the bow" to find his distance from a lighthouse or other object.

If he is sailing on the courseABCand notes a lighthouseLwhen he is atA, and takes the angleA, and if he notices when the angle that the lighthouse makes with his course is just twice the angle noted atA, thenBL=AB. He hasABfrom his log (an instrument that tells how far a ship goes in a given time), so he knowsBL. He has "doubled the angle on the bow" to get this distance.

It would have been possible for Thales, if he knew this proposition, to have measured the distance of the ship at sea by some such device as this:

Make a large isosceles triangle out of wood, and, standing atT, sight to the ship and along the shore on a lineTA, using the vertical angle of the triangle. Then go alongTAuntil a pointPis reached, from whichTandScan be seen along the sides of a base angle of the triangle. ThenTP=TS. By measuringTB,BScan then be found.

Theorem.The sum of two sides of a triangle is greater than the third side, and their difference is less than the third side.

If the postulate is assumed that a straight line is the shortest path between two points, then the first part of this theorem requires no further proof, and the second part follows at once from the axiom of inequalities. This seems the better plan for beginners, and the proposition may be considered as semiobvious. Euclid proved the first part, not having assumed the postulate. Proclus tells us that the Epicureans (the followers of Epicurus, the Greek philosopher, 342-270B.C.) used to ridicule this theorem, saying that even an ass knew it, for if he wished to get food, he walked in a straight line and not along two sides of a triangle. Proclus replied that it was one thing to know the truth and another thing to prove it, meaning that the value of geometry lay in the proof rather than in the mere facts, a thing that all who seek to reform the teaching of geometry would do well to keep in mind. The theorem might simply appear as a corollary under the postulate if it were of any importance to reduce the number of propositions one more.

If the proposition is postponed until after those concerning the inequalities of angles and sides of a triangle, there are several good proofs.

For example, produceACtoX,makingCX=CB.Then ∠X= ∠XBC.∴ ∠XBA> ∠X.∴AX>AB.∴AC+CB>AB.

The above proof is due to Euclid. Heron of Alexandria (first centuryA.D.) is said by Proclus to have given the following:

LetCXbisect ∠C.Then ∠BXC> ∠ACX.∴∠BXC> ∠XCB.∴CB>XB.Similarly,AC>AX.Adding,AC+CB>AB.

Theorem.If two sides of a triangle are unequal, the angles opposite these sides are unequal, and the angle opposite the greater side is the greater.

Euclid stated this more briefly by saying, "In any triangle the greater side subtends the greater angle." This is not so satisfactory, for there may be no greater side.

Theorem.If two angles of a triangle are unequal, the sides opposite these angles are unequal, and the side opposite the greater angle is the greater.

Euclid also stated this more briefly, but less satisfactorily, thus, "In any triangle the greater angle is subtended by the greater side." Students should have their attention called to the fact that these two theoremsare reciprocal or dual theorems, the words "sides" and "angles" of the one corresponding to the words "angles" and "sides" respectively of the other.

It may also be noticed that the proof of this proposition involves what is known as the Law of Converse; for(1) ifb=c, then ∠B= ∠C;(2) ifb>c, then ∠B> ∠C;(3) ifb ∠C, thenbcannot equalcwithout violating (1), andbcannot be less thancwithout violating (3), thereforeb>c;similarly, if ∠B< ∠C, thenb

It may also be noticed that the proof of this proposition involves what is known as the Law of Converse; for

(1) ifb=c, then ∠B= ∠C;(2) ifb>c, then ∠B> ∠C;(3) ifb

therefore the converses must necessarily be true as a matter of logic; for

if ∠B= ∠C, thenbcannot be greater thancwithout violating (2), andbcannot be less thancwithout violating (3), thereforeb=c;

and if ∠B> ∠C, thenbcannot equalcwithout violating (1), andbcannot be less thancwithout violating (3), thereforeb>c;

similarly, if ∠B< ∠C, thenb

This Law of Converse may readily be taught to pupils, and it has several applications in geometry.

Theorem.If two triangles have two sides of the one equal respectively to two sides of the other, but the included angle of the first triangle greater than the included angle of the second, then the third side of the first is greater than the third side of the second, and conversely.

In this proposition there are three possible cases: the pointYmay fall belowAB, as here shown, or onAB, or aboveAB. As an exercise for pupils all three may be considered if desired. Following Euclid and most early writers, however, only one case really need be proved, provided that is the most difficult one, and is typical. Proclus gave the proofs of the other two cases, and it is interesting to pupils to work them out for themselves. In such work it constantly appears that every proposition suggests abundant opportunity for originality, and that the complete form of proof in a textbook is not a bar to independent thought.

The Law of Converse, mentioned onpage 190, may be applied to the converse case if desired.

Theorem.Two angles whose sides are parallel, each to each, are either equal or supplementary.

This is not an ancient proposition, although the Greeks were well aware of the principle. It may be stated so as to include the case of the sides being perpendicular, each to each, but this is better left as an exercise. It is possible, by some circumlocution, to so state the theorem as to tell in what cases the angles are equal and in what cases supplementary. It cannot be tersely stated, however, and it seems better to leave this point as a subject for questioning by the teacher.

Theorem.The opposite sides of a parallelogram are equal.

Theorem.If the opposite sides of a quadrilateral are equal, the figure is a parallelogram.

This proposition is a very simple test for a parallelogram. It is the principle involved in the case of the common folding parallel ruler, an instrument that has long beenrecognized as one of the valuable tools of practical geometry. It will be of some interest to teachers to see one of the early forms of this parallel ruler, as shown in the illustration.[63]If such an instrument is not available in the school, one suitable for illustrative purposes can easily be made from cardboard.

Parallel Ruler of the Seventeenth Century San Giovanni's "Seconda squara mobile," Vicenza, 1686Parallel Ruler of the Seventeenth CenturySan Giovanni's "Seconda squara mobile," Vicenza, 1686

A somewhat more complicated form of this instrument may also be made by pupils in manual training, as is shown in this illustration from Bion's great treatise. The principle involved may be taken up in class, even if the instrument is not used. It is evident that, unless the workmanship is unusually good, this form of parallel ruler is not as accurate as the common one illustrated above. The principle is sometimes used in iron gates.

Parallel Ruler of the Eighteenth Century N. Bion's "Traité de la construction ... des instrumens de mathématique," The Hague, 1723Parallel Ruler of the Eighteenth CenturyN. Bion's "Traité de la construction ... des instrumens de mathématique," The Hague, 1723

Theorem.Two parallelograms are congruent if two sides and the included angle of the one are equal respectively to two sides and the included angle of the other.

This proposition is discussed in connection with the one that follows.

Theorem.If three or more parallels intercept equal segments on one transversal, they intercept equal segments on every transversal.

These two propositions are not given in Euclid, although generally required by American syllabi of the present time. The last one is particularly useful in subsequent work. Neither one offers any difficulty, and neither has any interesting history. There are, however, numerous interesting applications to the last one. One that is used in mechanical drawing is here illustrated.

If it is desired to divide a lineABinto five equal parts, we may take a piece of ruled tracing paper and lay it over the given line so that line 0 passes throughA, and line 5 throughB. We may then prick through the paper and thus determine the points onAB. Similarly, we may divideABinto any other number of equal parts.

Among the applications of these propositions is an interesting one due to the Arab Al-Nairīzī (ca.900A.D.). The problem is to divide a line into any number of equal parts, and he begins with the case of trisectingAB. It may be given as a case of practical drawing even before the problems are reached, particularly if some preliminary work with the compasses and straightedge has been given.

MakeBQandAQ'perpendicular toAB, and makeBP=PQ=AP'=P'Q'. Then ⧍XYZis congruent to ⧍YBP, and also to ⧍XAP'. ThereforeAX=XY=YB. In the same way we might continue to produceBQuntil it is made up ofn- 1 lengthsBP, and so forAQ', and by properly joining points we could divideABintonequal parts. In particular, if we joinPandP', we bisect the lineAB.

Theorem.If two sides of a quadrilateral are equal and parallel, then the other two sides are equal and parallel, and the figure is a parallelogram.

This was Euclid's first proposition on parallelograms, and Proclus speaks of it as the connecting link between the theory of parallels and that of parallelograms. The ancients, writing for mature students, did not add the words "and the figure is a parallelogram," because that follows at once from the first part and from the definition of "parallelogram," but it is helpful to younger students because it emphasizes the fact that here is a test for this kind of figure.

Theorem.The diagonals of a parallelogram bisect each other.

This proposition was not given in Euclid, but it is usually required in American syllabi. There is often given in connection with it the exercise in which it is proved that the diagonals of a rectangle are equal. When this is taken, it is well to state to the class that carpenters and builders find this one of the best checks in laying out floors and other rectangles. It is frequently applied also in laying out tennis courts. If the class is doing any work in mensuration, such as finding the area of the school grounds, it is a good plan to check a few rectangles by this method.

An interesting outdoor application of the theory of parallelograms is the following:

Suppose you are on the side of this stream opposite toXY, and wish to measure the length ofXY. Run a lineABalong the bank. Then take a carpenter's square, or even a large book, and walk alongABuntil you reachP, a point from which you can just seeXandBalong two sides of the square. Do the same forY, thus fixingPandQ. Using the tape, bisectPQatM. Then walk alongYMproduced until you reach a pointY'that is exactly in line withMandY, and also withPandX. Then walk alongXMproduced until you reach a pointX'that is exactly in line withMandX, and also withQandY. Then measureY'X'and you have the length ofXY. For sinceYX'is ⊥ toPQ, andXY'is also ⊥ toPQ,YX'is || toXY'. And sincePM=MQ, thereforeXM=MX'andY'M=MY. ThereforeY'X'YXis a parallelogram.

The properties of the parallelogram are often applied to proving figures of various kinds congruent, or to constructing them so that they will be congruent.

For example, if we drawA'B'equal and parallel toAB,B'C'equal and parallel toBC, and so on, it is easily proved thatABCDandA'B'C'D'are congruent. This may be done by ordinary superposition, or by slidingABCDalong the dotted parallels.

There are many applications of this principle of parallel translation in practical construction work. The principle is more far-reaching than here intimated, however, and a few words as to its significance will now be in place.

The efforts usually made to improve the spirit of Euclid are trivial. They ordinarily relate to some commonplace change of sequence, to some slight change in language, or to some narrow line of applications. Such attempts require no particular thought and yield no very noticeable result. But there is a possibility, remote though it may be at present, that a geometry will be developed that will be as serious as Euclid's and as effective in the education of the thinking individual. If so, it seems probable that it will not be based upon the congruence of triangles, by which so many propositions of Euclid are proved, but upon certain postulates of motion, of which one is involved in the above illustration,—the postulate of parallel translation. If to this we join the two postulates of rotation about an axis,[64]leading to axial symmetry; and rotation about a point,[65]leading to symmetry with respect to a center, we have a group of three motions upon which it is possible to base an extensive and rigid geometry.[66]It will be through some such effort as this, rather than through the weakening of the Euclid-Legendre style of geometry, that any improvement is likely to come. At present, in America, the important work for teachers is to vitalize the geometry they have,—an effort in which there are great possibilities,—seeing to it that geometry is not reduced to mere froth, and recognizing the possibility of another geometry that may sometime replace it,—a geometry

as rigid, as thought-compelling, as logical, and as truly educational.

Theorem.The sum of the interior angles of a polygon is equal to two right angles, taken as many times less two as the figure has sides.

This interesting generalization of the proposition about the sum of the angles of a triangle is given by Proclus. There are several proofs, but all are based upon the possibility of dissecting the polygon into triangles. The point from which lines are drawn to the vertices is usually taken at a vertex, so that there aren- 2 triangles. It may however be taken within the figure, makingntriangles, from the sum of the angles of which the four right angles about the point must be subtracted. The point may even be taken on one side, or outside the polygon, but the proof is not so simple. Teachers who desire to do so may suggest to particularly good students the proving of the theorem for a concave polygon, or even for a cross polygon, although the latter requires negative angles.

Some schools have transit instruments for the use of their classes in trigonometry. In such a case it is a good plan to measure the angles in some piece of land so as to verify the proposition, as well as show the care that must be taken in reading angles. In the absence of this exercise it is well to take any irregular polygon and measure the angles by the help of a protractor, and thus accomplish the same results.

Theorem.The sum of the exterior angles of a polygon, made by producing each of its sides in succession, is equal to four right angles.

This is also a proposition not given by the ancient writers. We have, however, no more valuable theorem for the purpose of showing the nature and significanceof the negative angle; and teachers may arouse a great deal of interest in the negative quantity by showing to a class that when an interior angle becomes 180° the exterior angle becomes 0, and when the polygon becomes concave the exterior angle becomes negative, the theorem holding for all these cases. We have few better illustrations of the significance of the negative quantity, and few better opportunities to use the knowledge of this kind of quantity already acquired in algebra.

In the hilly and mountainous parts of America, where irregular-shaped fields are more common than in the more level portions, a common test for a survey is that of finding the exterior angles when the transit instrument is set at the corners. In this field these angles are given, and it will be seen that the sum is 360°. In the absence of any outdoor work a protractor may be used to measure the exterior angles of a polygon drawn on paper. If there is an irregular piece of land near the school, the exterior angles can be fairly well measured by an ordinary paper protractor.

The idea of locus is usually introduced at the end of Book I. It is too abstract to be introduced successfully any earlier, although authors repeat the attempt from time to time, unmindful of the fact that all experience is opposed to it. The loci propositions are not ancient. The Greeks used the word "locus" (in Greek,topos), however. Proclus, for example, says, "I call those locus theorems in which the same property is found to exist on the whole of some locus." Teachers should be careful to have the pupils recognize the necessity for provingtwo things with respect to any locus: (1) that any point on the supposed locus satisfies the condition; (2) that any point outside the supposed locus does not satisfy the given condition. The first of these is called the "sufficient condition," and the second the "necessary condition." Thus in the case of the locus of points in a plane equidistant from two given points, it issufficientthat the point be on the perpendicular bisector of the line joining the given points, and this is the first part of the proof; it is alsonecessarythat it be on this line, i.e. it cannot be outside this line, and this is the second part of the proof. The proof of loci cases, therefore, involves a consideration of "the necessary and sufficient condition" that is so often spoken of in higher mathematics. This expression might well be incorporated into elementary geometry, and when it becomes better understood by teachers, it probably will be more often used.

In teaching loci it is helpful to call attention to loci in space (meaning thereby the space of three dimensions), without stopping to prove the proposition involved. Indeed, it is desirable all through plane geometry to refer incidentally to solid geometry. In the mensuration of plane figures, which may be boundaries of solid figures, this is particularly true.

It is a great defect in most school courses in geometry that they are entirely confined to two dimensions. Even if solid geometry in the usual sense is not attempted, every occasion should be taken to liberate boys' minds from what becomes the tyranny of paper. Thus the questions: "What is the locus of a point equidistant from two given points; at a constant distance from a given straight line or from a given point?" should be extended to space.[67]

The two loci problems usually given at this time, referring to a point equidistant from the extremities of a given line, and to a point equidistant from two intersecting lines, both permit of an interesting extension to three dimensions without any formal proof. It is possible to give other loci at this point, but it is preferable merely to introduce the subject in Book I, reserving the further discussion until after the circle has been studied.

It is well, in speaking of loci, to remember that it is entirely proper to speak of the "locus of a point" or the "locus of points." Thus the locus of apointso moving in a plane as constantly to be at a given distance from a fixed point in the plane is a circle. In analytic geometry we usually speak of the locus of apoint, thinking of the point as being anywhere on the locus. Some teachers of elementary geometry, however, prefer to speak of the locus ofpoints, or the locus ofall points, thus tending to make the language of elementary geometry differ from that of analytic geometry. Since it is a trivial matter of phraseology, it is better to recognize both forms of expression and to let pupils use the two interchangeably.

Having taken up all of the propositions usually given in Book I, it seems unnecessary to consider as specifically all those in subsequent books. It is therefore proposed to select certain ones that have some special interest, either from the standpoint of mathematics or from that of history or application, and to discuss them as fully as the circumstances seem to warrant.

Theorems.In the same circle or in equal circles equal central angles intercept equal arcs; and of two unequal central angles the greater intercepts the greater arc, and conversely for both of these cases.

Euclid made these the twenty-sixth and twenty-seventh propositions of his Book III, but he limited them as follows: "In equal circles equal angles stand on equal circumferences, whether they stand at the centers or at the circumferences, and conversely." He therefore included two of our present theorems in one, thus making the proposition doubly hard for a beginner. After these two propositions the Law of Converse, already mentioned onpage 190, may properly be introduced.

Theorems.In the same circle or in equal circles, if two arcs are equal, they are subtended by equal chords; and if two arcs are unequal, the greater is subtended by the greater chord, and conversely.

Euclid dismisses all this with the simple theorem, "In equal circles equal circumferences are subtended byequal straight lines." It will therefore be noticed that he has no special word for "chord" and none for "arc," and that the word "circumference," which some teachers are so anxious to retain, is used to mean both the whole circle and any arc. It cannot be doubted that later writers have greatly improved the language of geometry by the use of these modern terms. The word "arc" is the same, etymologically, as "arch," each being derived from the Latinarcus(a bow). "Chord" is from the Greek, meaning "the string of a musical instrument." "Subtend" is from the Latinsub(under), andtendere(to stretch).

It should be noticed that Euclid speaks of "equal circles," while we speak of "the same circle or equal circles," confining our proofs to the latter, on the supposition that this sufficiently covers the former.

Theorem.A line through the center of a circle perpendicular to a chord bisects the chord and the arcs subtended by it.

This is an improvement on Euclid, III, 3: "If in a circle a straight line through the center bisects a straight line not through the center, it also cuts it at right angles; and if it cuts it at right angles, it also bisects it." It is a very important proposition, theoretically and practically, for it enables us to find the center of a circle if we know any part of its arc. A civil engineer, for example, who wishes to find the center of the circle of which some curve (like that on a running track, on a railroad, or in a park) is an arc, takes two chords, say of one hundred feet each, and erects perpendicular bisectors. It is well to ask a class why, in practice, it is better to take these chords some distance apart. Engineers often check their work by taking three chords, the perpendicular bisectorsof the three passing through a single point. Illustrations of this kind of work are given later in this chapter.

Theorem.In the same circle or in equal circles equal chords are equidistant from the center, and chords equidistant from the center are equal.

This proposition is practically used by engineers in locating points on an arc of a circle that is too large to be described by a tape, or that cannot easily be reached from the center on account of obstructions.

Back to Index Next