This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

**Segments and Rays
**

Using the idea of betweenness, we can deﬁne some important subsets of lines, called segments and rays.

Segments

Suppose A and B are two distinct points. We deﬁne the segment determined by A and B, denoted by AB, to be the following set of points: ← → AB = P ∈ AB : P = A or P = B or A ∗ P ∗ B . A segment is also sometimes called a line segment. In words, the segment AB is the set comprising A and B and all points between them. It is obvious from the deﬁnition and the symmetry of betweenness that AB = BA. The points A and B are called the endpoints of AB, and all points in AB other than A and B are called interior points of AB. (Thus P is an interior point of AB if and only if A ∗ P ∗ B.) We deﬁne the length of AB to be the distance AB. We say two segments AB and CD are congruent, symbolized by AB ∼ CD, if they have the same length: = AB ∼ CD = ⇔ AB = CD.

Note that the deﬁnition of a segment AB includes the stipulation that A and B are distinct points, so every segment has positive length. If we say “Let AB be a segment” without having previously introduced A and B, this should be understood as including the assumption that A and B are distinct points. Recall from Chapter 1 that in the Elements, Euclid stated ﬁve properties of magnitudes that he called “common notions,” which he used when comparing line segments, angles, and areas. The next theorem gives modern analogues of all ﬁve of Euclid’s common notions in order, as they apply to segments. (Later we will apply the common notions also to angle measures and areas.) Theorem 5.1 (Euclid’s Common Notions for Segments). (a) Transitivity of Congruence: Two segments that are both congruent to a third segment are congruent to each other. 49

to prove (e). therefore. AC − AB > 0. The proof of (c) is similar. The next lemma relates the deﬁnition of a segment to coordinate functions. ⇔ f (P ) = f (A) or f (P ) = f (B) or f (A) < f (P ) < f (B) (deﬁnition of betweenness) ⇔ f (A) ≤ f (P ) ≤ f (B) This proves (5. but with the inequalities reversed. assume that A ∗ B ∗ C. we have AC − AB = BC.1). SEGMENTS AND RAYS C C Fig. = = = (c) Segment Subtraction Theorem: Suppose A ∗ B ∗ C and A ∗ B ∗ C . Finally. By the betweenness theorem for points. then AC ∼ A C .1). which implies AC > AB. if f (A) < f (B). ⇔ f (P ) = f (A) or f (P ) = f (B) or A ∗ P ∗ B . (e) The Whole Segment is Greater Than the Part: If A ∗ B ∗ C. 5. If AC ∼ A C and = AB ∼ A B .1: The segment addition and subtraction theorems. To prove (b). (5. Then for any point P ∈ AB. Lemma 5. we have the following equivalences: P ∈ AB ⇔ P = A or P = B or A ∗ P ∗ B (deﬁnition of segment) (because f is bijective) (algebra). and f : AB → R is a coordinate function for AB.2) ← → Proof. = = (d ) Reﬂexivity of Congruence: Every segment is congruent to itself.2) is identical. Suppose A and B are distinct ← → ← → points. the betweenness theorem for points and the deﬁnition of congruence imply AC = AB + BC = A B + B C = A C . The proof of (5.50 A A B B CHAPTER 5. (b) Segment Addition Theorem: Suppose A ∗ B ∗ C and A ∗ B ∗ C (see Fig. If AB ∼ A B and BC ∼ B C . 5.2 (Coordinate Representation of a Segment). and by Theorem 4. then AC > AB. just note that under the given hypotheses. then BC ∼ B C . Suppose ﬁrst that f (A) > f (B). Then ← → AB = {P ∈ AB : f (A) ≤ f (P ) ≤ f (B)} ← → AB = {P ∈ AB : f (A) ≥ f (P ) ≥ f (B)} if f (A) < f (B). Proof.1) (5. By substitution. BC > 0.8. Statements (a) and (d) are immediate consequences of the deﬁnition of congruence together with familiar properties of equality.

then AB ⊆ AC and BC ⊆ AC. In the ﬁrst two cases. and B are points. If it is the former.1. To show that two sets are equal. we had to show that if P ∈ AB. If M is a midpoint of AB. we often say that M bisects AB. But this implies M = B.2. In the proof above. The deﬁnition of midpoint implies that M ∈ AB.4. and let f : → R be a coordinate function for such that f (A) = 0 and f (C) > 0. . much more frequently. Theorem 5. A similar argument shows that P ∈ BC implies P ∈ AC. Begin by assuming that P ∈ AB ∪ BC .SEGMENTS 51 This is a good place to pause and make an important remark about set-theoretic proofs. then A ∗ M ∗ B. This is an assertion that two sets are equal. and every element of T is an element of S. we have f (A) ≤ f (P ) ≤ f (B) and thus P ∈ AB. and then by transitivity of inequalities it follows that f (P ) < f (C). Proof. assume that P ∈ AC. In this case. The proof of (b) is left to Problem 5. If A ∗ B ∗ C. it is necessary to prove the two implications separately.3. which means that either M = A. and therefore A and B are the same point. we prove (a). and we are done. Let be the line containing A. This is relatively rare. If M is a midpoint of AB. there are three cases: f (P ) < f (B). First. which implies P ∈ BC. Thus f (A) ≤ f (P ) < f (C). B. A midpoint of AB is a point that is included in AB and is equidistant from A and B. and C. or A ∗ M ∗ B. Conversely. Let AB be a segment. say S = T . (b) AB ∩ BC = {B}. because each step of the proof was an “if and only if” statement. Lemma 5. Now by the trichotomy law for real numbers.1). This means that either P ∈ AB or P ∈ BC. The proof of the next theorem illustrates how this is done. or. Corollary 5. then it satisﬁes the membership criterion for the set on the right-hand side of (5. In the third case. f (B) < f (P ) ≤ f (C). or f (P ) > f (B). and we also say that any segment or line that intersects AB only at M bisects AB. we were lucky enough to be able to prove both implications simultaneously. and conversely. we always have to prove two things: Every element of S is an element of T . (The existence of such a function is guaranteed by the ruler placement theorem. so the only remaining possibility is that A ∗ M ∗ B. however. we say that P is equidistant from A and B if P A = P B. contradicting the assumption that AB is a segment. then Lemma 5. If P . If A ∗ B ∗ C. The next lemma gives a useful alternative characterization of midpoints. A similar proof shows that M cannot equal B. which implies P ∈ AC. equivalently. f (P ) = f (B). Suppose M is a midpoint of AB. this means that f (A) ≤ f (P ) ≤ f (C). and vice versa. M = B. The next corollary follows immediately from part (a) of the preceding theorem.) Then the fact that A ∗ B ∗ C means that f (A) < f (B) < f (C). Thus we have shown that AB ∪ BC ⊆ AC. then AM = 0. Thus AC ⊆ AB ∪ BC. so we need to prove two things: Every point in the left-hand set is also in the right-hand one.2 shows that f (A) ≤ f (P ) ≤ f (B). Proof. If M = A. S ⊆ T and T ⊆ S. A. and the fact that M is equidistant from A and B implies that BM = 0 also. Suppose AB is a segment. then the following set equalities hold: (a) AB ∪ BC = AC. By Lemma 5.5.

because 0 < 2 b < b. Lemma 5.6.6. so M is an interior point of AB.4) Comparing (5. and if M = B. For us. AM = 1 AB = 1 b. let f : AB → R be a coordinate function for AB such that f (A) = 0 and f (B) > 0. Conversely. and therefore AM + M B = AB by the betweenness theorem. we obtain 2AM = AB. To prove uniqueness. it follows 2 that M = M . We must prove two things: existence (AB has at least one midpoint) and uniqueness (AB has at most one midpoint).6. Because M lies in AB (by deﬁnition of a midpoint). Every segment has a unique midpoint. so the ruler postulate gives AM = f (M ) − f (A) = m − 0 = m .52 CHAPTER 5. 2 2 (5.6 that M is a midpoint of AB.10. then the ruler postulate implies that AB = |f (B) − f (A)| = |b − 0| = b. Suppose ﬁrst that AM = 1 AB. there is a unique point M ∈ AB such that f (M ) = 1 b. Because f is injective. Proof. If we write b = f (B).7 (Existence and Uniqueness of Midpoints). we conclude that M B = AM .2 shows that M lies in AB. A point M ∈ AB is a midpoint of AB if and only if AM = 1 2 AB. First. and uniqueness is proved. the existence and uniqueness of midpoints can be proved more straightforwardly using the ruler postulate. the ruler postulate and a little algebra show that AM = |f (M ) − f (A)| = 1 2b − 1 0 = 1 b = 2 AB. . We will show that 2 1 M is a midpoint of AB. suppose that M is another midpoint of AB. ← → Because f is bijective. Substituting AM for M B in this equation.3) and (5. (5. then AM = AB. 2 Therefore. Lemma 5. and therefore M is a midpoint of AB. Because AB is a segment and 2 thus AB > 0. then AM = 0. Proof. we see that f (M ) = m = 1 b = f (M ). let m = f (M ).4). suppose M is a midpoint of AB. so that AM = M B. Subtracting AM from both sides. By Lemma 5. which is also a contradiction. 2 In his Proposition I. Let AB be a segment. Then the betweenness theorem yields AM + M B = AB = 2AM.5 shows that A ∗ M ∗ B. which implies AM = 1 AB. Euclid proved that every segment has a midpoint by showing that it can be constructed using compass and straightedge. If M = A. which is a contradiction. our assumption implies 0 < AM < AB. ← → ← → To prove existence. we have 0 ≤ m ≤ b by Lemma 5. Let M be a point in AB. SEGMENTS AND RAYS Lemma 5. Theorem 5. it follows from Lemma 5. Let AB be a segment.3) Using the same coordinate function f as above. Next.

However. r). then the set exists. ← → Proof. Postulates 1–5 are not yet strong enough to ensure that there are any more than two points on a circle. The next theorem guarantees that they do. in itself. we might wish to verify that segments contain plenty of points. r) = {P : OP = r}.8. as with segments. we might ask similar questions about them. The reason is that just deﬁning an object does not. there are inﬁnitely many points between A and B. the circle with center O and radius r is denoted by C (O. because it yields a perfectly well-deﬁned set.6 says anything whatsoever about what f (M ) is supposed to be. Every segment contains inﬁnitely many distinct points. Euclid’s Postulate 3 asserted that it is possible to describe a circle with any center and any radius (by which he meant. we have to show that every midpoint will have to satisfy f (M ) = 2 b for this coordinate function. If O is any point and r is any positive number. Thus the deﬁnition of the segment AB needs no further elaboration. when we wrote “there is a unique point M ∈ AB such that 1 f (M ) = 2 b”? The answer is that. if we are not careful. For example. It is also important to understand why we need to prove the existence of the midpoint of AB. In general. thus C (O.” If we wish to talk about “the midpoint” of a segment. In order to turn this idea into a proof that M is 1 the only midpoint. when we have not bothered to prove the existence of other geometric objects such as the segment AB itself. although the ruler postulate guarantees that there is a unique point M such that f (M ) = 1 b. It certainly contains P . and using the postulates we have introduced so far. Theorem 5. On the other hand. Let AB be a segment and f : AB → R be a coordinate function. there exists a circle whose center is O and whose radius is OP ). we might inadvertently deﬁne a set only to discover that it is empty. For us. Since there are inﬁnitely many numbers between f (A) and f (B). Since Euclid gave circles a prominent place in his postulates. the safest course is usually to write two separate proofs. OP ) exists as a well-deﬁned set. Of course. we have to prove that it exists. Of course. if we deﬁne a set of points. there is no need to assume this as a postulate or to prove it as a theorem: Given distinct points O and P . that given two distinct points O and P . as long as the deﬁnition stipulates unambiguously what it means for a point to be in that set. just as there is no “smallest positive real number. but unfortunately there is no such point. One way to see this is to observe that our ﬁrst ﬁve postulates are satisﬁed in .2). it is possible to prove that it contains at least one other point (see Problem 5. The given point is called the center of the circle. and the given distance is called its radius. which is essentially what we did in the last paragraph. one for existence and one for uniqueness. our deﬁnition ensures that the circle C (O. Thus in order to be sure that the deﬁnition of a segment describes something interesting. for the simple reason that neither the deﬁnition of midpoint nor Lemma 5. we might have deﬁned “the closest point to A in the interior of AB” to be the point in the interior of AB whose distance to A is smaller than that of every other point in the interior of AB. we might like to prove that this circle contains inﬁnitely many points. This is a perfectly unambiguous deﬁnition. when you are asked to prove existence and uniqueness of something. We deﬁne a circle to be a set consisting of all points whose distance from a given point is equal to a given positive number. ensure that such an object exists. in our terminology.SEGMENTS 53 You might wonder why we needed the last paragraph of this proof—didn’t we already show in ← → the second paragraph that M is unique. this is not precisely the same as saying there is a unique midpoint 2 M .

5. and the notation AB. (5.3). We sometimes say that a ray starts at A if A is its endpoint.5) − − → ← → AB = {P ∈ AB : f (P ) ≤ f (A)} if f (A) > f (B). B B B . However. Then − − → ← → AB = {P ∈ AB : f (P ) ≥ f (A)} if f (A) < f (B).11). This relationship between coordinate functions and rays allows us to prove some important properties of points on rays. or the length of the segment AB).54 CHAPTER 5.4. Note that the actual converse to that theorem is not true.6) Proof. 5. and any point on the ray other than A is called an interior − → point of AB.2. Rays The other important type of subset we need to deﬁne is a ray. after we have introduced more postulates. B. − − → ← → It is obvious from the deﬁnitions that AB ⊆ AB ⊆ AB (Fig. The next theorem is a partial converse to Theorem 5. Suppose A and B are distinct points.9 (Coordinate Representation of a Ray). Be sure to observe the A AB A A − − → AB ← → AB Fig. because AC > AB does not imply A ∗ B ∗ C even if A. The − → point A is called the endpoint of AB. a ray. this is the point A together with all of the points in the same half of AB as B.) In the next chapter. we will prove that every circle in neutral geometry contains inﬁnitely many points. if we assume in addition that B and C are on the “same side of A” (or. Given distinct points A and B. which all designate sets of points in the plane. SEGMENTS AND RAYS line geometry (Example 4. distinction between notations like these three.2). ← → Intuitively.3. that they are interior points of the same ray starting at A). (5. and a line. The following lemma is the analogue for rays of Lemma 5. ← → ← → and f : AB → R is a coordinate function for AB. we − → deﬁne the ray AB to be the set − − → ← → AB = P ∈ AB : P = A or P = B or A ∗ P ∗ B or A ∗ B ∗ P .2: A segment. but in that interpretation every circle contains exactly two points! (See Problem 5. then we can conclude the converse implication. 5. Lemma 5. Problem 5. C are assumed to be collinear (see Fig. more precisely. which designates a real number (the distance from A to B.1(e) (the whole segment is greater than the part).

however: First. 5. Then − − → P ∈ AB if and only if P ∗ A ∗ B. whereas Euclid has to start with a segment that is already longer than the desired length. There are several diﬀerences.7. our concept of a ray extending inﬁnitely far in one direction frees us from having to worry about how long the initial segment is. ← → Theorem 5. Proof.10 (Partial Converse to the Whole Segment Greater Than the Part). of course.” the way he actually uses the postulate is by extending a segment to form a longer segment.5. it is possible “to cut oﬀ from the greater a straight line equal to the less.” The next theorem is our analogue of that proposition. Problem 5. giving a number that is to be the length of the new segment is suﬃcient. The next corollary is a more literal analogue of Euclid’s Proposition I.3. If AB and CD are segments with AB > CD. and P is a point on the line AB. = Proof. (Euclid. The next theorem is our analogue of Euclid’s second postulate. Suppose AB is a ray and r is a positive − − → real number. One of the most basic constructions in Euclidean geometry is marking oﬀ a segment of a certain predetermined length along a ray. −→ − Theorem 5. The segment construction theorem shows that there is a unique point E in the interior of − − → AB such that AE = CD. Our theorem makes this possibility explicit.) Second. If AD −→ − is a ray and B and C are interior points of AD such that AC > AB.6. which says that given two segments. Suppose A and B are distinct points. Problem 5. The next theorem gives a useful criterion for deciding when a point is not on a ray. Euclid justiﬁes this with his Proposition I.11. . Problem 5. Proof. Then there exists a unique point C in the interior of AB such that AC = r. and choosing an arbitrary point on the extended part. there is a unique point E in the interior of AB such that AE ∼ CD. could not state his proposition this way because he did not use numbers to measure lengths.12 (Segment Construction Theorem).” Although Euclid did not say precisely what he meant by “produce. − − → Theorem 5. The proof of this theorem is very similar to that of the theorem on existence and uniqueness of midpoints. so E is in the interior of AB. Corollary 5.3.13 (Euclid’s Segment Cutoﬀ Theorem). which asserts that it is possible “to produce a ﬁnite straight line continuously in a straight line.3: AC > AB does not imply A ∗ B ∗ C. then A ∗ B ∗ C. / Proof.RAYS C A B 55 Fig.10 shows that A ∗ E ∗ B. we do not need to assume that we already have a segment of the desired length to use as a model. and Theorem 5.

but not both. 5. and C are collinear. SEGMENTS AND RAYS Theorem 5. − − → − → (a) If A. ← → ← → First we will prove (a). D ∈ AB such that C ∗ A ∗ B and A ∗ B ∗ D. − − → − → (d ) AB and AC are the same ray if and only if they have an interior point in common. We will use this coordinate function in several of the arguments below. This means that AB = AC. Two rays with the same endpoint A B C C A B − − → − → Fig. Thus either f (C) > 0 or f (C) < 0. Problem 5.4: AB = AC.14 (Segment Extension Theorem). The assumption that AB and AC are rays means. and C are collinear. If f (C) > 0. Suppose AB and AC are rays with the same endpoint. If AB is any segment. B.8.5: AB and AC are opposite rays. 5. Since − − → ← → − → ← → − − → − → AB ⊆ AB and AC ⊆ AC by deﬁnition of rays. The next proof is rated PG. Proof. . are said to be collinear rays if there is a line that contains both of them. Suppose A. we see that f (C) = 0. in particular. − − → − → Theorem 5. and they are said to be opposite rays if their union is a line. 5. it follows that both AB and AC are contained in ← → the line AB. then AB ∩ AC = {A} and AB ∪ AC = AC. there is a coordinate function f : AB → R such that f (A) = 0 and f (B) > 0. then AB and AC are collinear. − − → − → (e) AB and AC are opposite rays if and only if C ∗ A ∗ B. not because it is terribly hard. it is possible that AC and AB might be exactly the same ray (Fig.15 (Properties of Rays with the Same Endpoint).56 CHAPTER 5. ← → Next we will prove (b). − − → − → Proof. that neither B nor C is ← → equal to A. then they are either equal or opposite. − − → − → Fig. − − → − → (b) If AB and AC are collinear.5). − − → − → − − → − → − − → − → ← → (c) If AB and AC are opposite rays. but not both. By the ruler placement theorem. the point B serves only to indicate which direction along the line AB the ray ← → − → − − → points. Because the hypotheses imply that C ∈ AB and C = A. Lemma 5. but because it could end up being a lot of work if the parts are proved in a diﬀerent order from the one given here. 5. B. if C is a third point on the line AB. or they might be diﬀerent rays (Fig. Opposite Rays − − → ← → In the notation AB.9 shows that − → ← → − − → AC = {P ∈ AB : f (P ) ≥ 0} = AB. there exist points ← → C. so they are collinear.4).

Arguing as in the preceding paragraph. / − − → Conversely. nonempty subsets called the sides of . then Theorem 5. and vice-versa.9 shows that − − → ← → AB = {P ∈ AB : f (P ) ≥ 0}. and not the geometry of a line or of three-dimensional (or even higher-dimensional) space. the set of all points not on is the union of two disjoint. The union of the two sets is clearly all of AB. and if we take the contrapositive of each of those implications.7) (5. The plane separation postulate serves several very important purposes. On the other hand.7) and (5. suppose they have an interior point in common. so by deﬁnition AB and AC are opposite rays. The fact that the two conditions are equivalent follows by taking contrapositives: Condition (i) includes two implications.9 shows that AB and AC are described by formulas (5. and therefore Lemma 5. if f (C) < 0. respectively. this is the postulate that ensures that we are really talking about the geometry of a plane. Then the only point − − → they have in common is A. if and only if P Q ∩ = ∅. 57 (5. so in particular C ∈ AB. which is true if and only if P = A.8) ← → − − → − → The union of these two sets is obviously all of AB. If they were opposite.8). Obviously. Thus AB and AC are collinear. so in fact they are equal. if C ∗ A ∗ B. Suppose ﬁrst that AB and AC are opposite rays. not opposite). say P . On the other hand. it follows that both lines AB and AC contain the two points P and A. so part (b) shows that they must be equal or opposite. this implies C ∗ A ∗ B. and let f be the same coordinate function as before. if AB and AC are equal. they would have only A in common by part (c). then both of the following equivalent conditions are satisﬁed: (i ) P and Q are on the same side of (ii ) P and Q are on opposite sides of if and only if P Q ∩ = ∅.PLANE SEPARATION so the rays are equal.11 shows that C ∈ AB. the next theorem (which is the fourth axiom of incidence geometry) shows that we are no longer talking about the one-dimensional geometry of a line. By Theorem 5. If P and Q are distinct points not on . we prove (e). so the two rays cannot be equal / and thus are opposite. Conversely. they have lots of interior points in common. we obtain the two implications in (ii). . we conclude that f (C) < 0 (since otherwise − − → − → − − → − → AB and AC would be equal. Since P is not equal ← → ← → to A. − − → − → To prove (c). First of all. suppose AB and AC are opposite rays.11. − − → − → Next we prove (d). Plane Separation Our next postulate takes us for the ﬁrst time into the realm of two dimensions. To see why three-dimensional geometry cannot satisfy the plane separation postulate. − − → − → Finally. just imagine a line in space—you will see very quickly that there is no way to divide all the points not on the line into two disjoint sets satisfying properties (i) and (ii). Lemma 5. A point P lies in both sets if and only if ← → f (P ) = 0. so they must be the − − → − → same line. Postulate 6 (The Plane Separation Postulate). − → ← → AC = {P ∈ AB : f (P ) ≤ 0}. For any line .

” these points do not lie on . Thus if is a line and A. are now theorems of neutral geometry.6: The open half-plane OHP( . • If A and B are on opposite sides while B and C are on the same side. P ).6). and by deﬁnition of “sides of a line. (Incidence Axioms 1 and 2 follow from our Postulate 3. Incidence Axiom 3 follows from Theorem 4. The next lemma expresses an important property of rays that seems geometrically “obvious”: If a ray starts on a line and goes to one side of the line.16.7: The closed half-plane CHP( . 5. P ) ∪ .7). then A and C are on the same side.) Therefore. P ) to denote the closed half-plane consisting of all points that are either on or on the same side of as P (Fig. then A and C are on opposite sides and thus AC intersects .58 CHAPTER 5. either of the sides of is called an open half-plane. 5. Another major purpose served by the plane separation postulate is to give an explicit axiomatic justiﬁcation for a whole raft of “geometrically obvious” facts that Euclid often assumed from diagrams without comment. and Incidence Axiom 5 is our Posulate 2. we will use the notation OHP( . This will be useful in our study of angles. • If A and B are on opposite sides of and B and C are also on opposite sides. among many other things. we can draw the following conclusions: • If A and B are on the same side of and B and C are also on the same side. 5. SEGMENTS AND RAYS Theorem 5.8) is suggestive of the letter Y. all of the theorems of incidence geometry. . so AC does not intersect . If is a line and P is a point not on . For every line.9.3 through 3. the plane separation postulate shows that each side of point. contains at least one We have now shown that all ﬁve axioms of incidence geometry are true in our axiomatic system. A set consisting of all points on one side of together will all points on itself is called a closed half-plane. If is a line. P ). P P Fig. it cannot cross over to the other side. We call it the Y-lemma because the drawing that goes with it (Fig. If is a line. we have just proved Incidence Axiom 4.9. It follows from the deﬁnitions that CHP( . 5. Many of these follow from the fact that every line has exactly two sides. Fig. B. such as Theorems 3. and CHP( . P ) to denote the open half-plane consisting of all points on the same side of as P (Fig. then A and C are on the same side. P ) = OHP( . C are points not on . so AC does not intersect . Proof. 5. there is a point that does not lie on it.

17 (The Y-Lemma). and B is a point not on . then the ray lies on that side. 5. Suppose P is an arbitrary interior point on AB. As A is not equal to P or B. Suppose is a line. − − → ← → Proof. but when we say AB lies on one side. Suppose OA and OB are opposite rays. we can make the following deﬁnition.8: Setup for the Y-lemma.PLANE SEPARATION B A 59 Fig. this contradicts Theorem 5.9). and A is the only point of ∩ AB. the point A itself does not lie on − − → either side of . the point in ∩ P B must be A itself. This proves the ﬁrst conclusion. Since the lines and AB are distinct. Then OA and OB lie on opposite sides of . The hypothesis implies that neither A nor B lies on . − − → Because P lies on AB. or it lies on the opposite side. This means that AB intersects . 5. and is a line that ← → − → −→ − intersects AB only at O (Fig. − → −→ − Lemma 5. we mean that its interior points do. so P does not lie on . But since ← → ← → P B is contained in AB.11. it follows from Theorem 5. and AB ⊆ CHP( . Because of the Y-lemma. To say that the ray AB lies on a certain side of means − − → that every interior point of AB lies on that side. which means that P ∗ A ∗ B. B O A Fig. it must be an interior point of P B. and B is a point not on − − → − − → . . A is a point on . Then every interior point of AB is on the same side of as B. Of course. Suppose is a line. − → −→ − Proof. This means that there is a point of P B that lies on . they only have the single point A in common by Theorem 4. Because OA and OB are opposite rays. so A and − → −→ − B are on opposite sides of . The Y-lemma tells us that if one point of a ray lies on a certain side. assume for the sake of contradiction that it is on the opposite side. this implies that OA and OB are on opposite sides of . Thus either P lies on the same side of as B. 5.18 (The X-Lemma). A is a point − → on . The fact − − → that AB ⊆ CHP( .9: Setup for the X-lemma. B).15(e) that A ∗ O ∗ B.3. By the Y-lemma. Lemma 5. B) follows from the deﬁnition of closed half-planes.

it follows that AX ⊆ AB. Every open or closed half-plane is a convex set. Theorem 5. and hence also of P . In this case AB ⊆ OHP( . P ). P ).10 illustrates examples of a convex set and a nonconvex set in the plane. . Let T be a closed half-plane. and thus by Theorem 5.3. SEGMENTS AND RAYS Our last theorem in this chapter expresses an important property of half-planes.19. Now we will prove that closed half-planes are convex. Let S be any open half-plane: Then S = OHP( . P ). There are three cases. P ) for some and P as above. Since AB ⊆ AB. so T = CHP( . We need to show that AB ⊆ S. Thus X is on the same side of as A. 5. we say that S is convex if whenever P and Q are distinct points in S. this is the same as saying X ∈ S.1. P ) for some line and some point P not on . Fig. This means that A ∗ X ∗ B. Suppose A and B are any two distinct points in T .60 CHAPTER 5.3(b) (about the intersection of segments with a common endpoint). P ) by the argument in the preceding paragraph. First we will prove that open half-planes are convex. Problems 5. Suppose X is such an interior point.11). say that A ∈ and B ∈ OHP( . Suppose A and B are any two distinct points in S (Fig. Without loss of − − → generality. Case 3: One of the points A or B lies on and the other lies in OHP( . 5.10: A convex set and a nonconvex set. Then AB ⊆ by deﬁnition of a segment. Prove Theorem 5. Proof. Then the Y-lemma implies that the entire ray AB − − → is contained in CHP( . 5. Case 2: A and B both lie on . it follows that AX does not either. Q P P Q Fig. the entire segment P Q is contained in S. so we need only show that every interior point of AB lies in S. themselves lie in S. the result follows. Since AB does not intersect . P ). Case 1: A and B both lie in the open half-plane OHP( . P ) ⊆ CHP( . To state it concisely.11: An open half-plane is convex. 5. it is convenient to introduce another deﬁnition: If S is a set of points. We know by assumption that A and B P A X B Fig.

9 (coordinate representations of rays).6.8. − − → − − → ← → (b) AB ∪ BA = AB. 5. Prove Theorem 5.5.11 (characterizing points not on a ray). 5. 5.9. Prove Theorem 5.7. every circle contains exactly two points.14 (the segment extension theorem). 5.2. 5. Prove Theorem 5. 5. Prove that in line geometry (Example 4. prove the following set equalities: − − → − − → (a) AB ∩ BA = AB. If A and B are two distinct points. Prove Lemma 5.11).12 (the segment construction theorem). that every circle contains at least two distinct points. Prove Theorem 5.4. Prove.PROBLEMS 61 5.10 (the partial converse to the whole segment is greater than the part). using only Postulates 1–5 (and the theorems that follow from them). 5. .3.

62 CHAPTER 5. SEGMENTS AND RAYS .

- Ultimate Chocolate Chip Cookies
- Choc Chip Cookies 1
- Theorems Incidence
- SolutionPractice Midterm
- Solution 1
- Quad.08
- Presentation II
- prep2.5and2.3
- Pasch's Theorem
- notes-c02
- Neutral.08
- Models
- math366hw3
- m432ass2sol
- m432ass2
- hw2
- Geometry Tests 3
- Geometry Tests 2
- Geometry Tests 1
- Geometry Propositions
- Euclidean.08
- Contradict
- congruence.08
- Conditions.08

Math

Math

- betweenness.08
- Geometry 10
- High School Mathematics Vol 6 1959
- Geometry
- 9902155
- congruence.08
- MatsudaN04
- Godel
- Chapter 1
- Smith Peter Godel Without Tears
- Ch12_ResolutionTheoremProving
- Godel Without Tears
- How to Prove a Mathematical Theory - Scott Kennedy
- Interactive Computing Does Not Supersede Church's Thesis
- Boudhayana
- A practical theory of programming
- P-bases for Torsion-free Regular Modules
- Mancosu 1991
- Partial Words and a Theorem of Fine and Wilf
- Exponential Theorems, Proofs and Problems
- Proof of Thomson theorem of electrostatics
- Errata for First Printing of Automata Computability and Complexity Theory and Applications
- Geometry for Schools HS Hall 2nd Ed 1889bw
- MIT6 042JF10 Proof
- 7320_chap01
- 5CongruenceIII
- Abstract
- Algorithmic Number Theory-IITD
- Proximinality in Geodesic Spaces
- C 1 2011
- Segments and Rays

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd