SOMERECENTDISCOVERIES

IN ELEMENTARY
GEOMETRY 391

Some recent discoveries in elementary geometry

PAUL SCOTT

Introduction
I have always disagreedwith governmentministerswho assertthat it is a
good idea to separate teaching from research at the universities. For I
believe that with mathematics,researchand good teaching go hand in hand.
And if we interpret'research'in its widest terms of questioning,discovery,
involvement, etc, then I believe that the same holds true at the school level.
Mathematicsneeds to be taughtas a vibrant,living subjectwhich challenges
the intellect and the imagination,not as a dusty collection of historicalfacts.
Further,asking questionsis just as much fun as answeringthem!
I have recently been challenged in my reading with a number of new
insights and discoveries in the area of elementary geometry. We shall
survey some of these, with the emphasison ideas ratherthanproofs.

Pythagoras'theorem
Everyone knows the classical theorem of Pythagoras:given a triangle
ABC with a right angle at C, and side lengths a, b and c as in Figure 1, then
2 2
a + b2 = c
+ b

Problem 1. Is it possible to generalise Pythagoras' theorem to

3-space? Whatwould such a generalisationstate? Tryit now!
The answer is, given any right tetrahedron,with right angles at D, and
face areasa, r, r and 8 as in Figure 2, then
2 2=
a 2+ ? .
This 'obvious' analogue appeared in a paper by Parthasarathy[1] in
1978 and was recently rediscovered by Ward [2]. It has an analogue in
A I
c

c b

YB
A
B a C
FIGURE1 FIGURE 2
392 THEMATHEMATICAL
GAZETTE

general dimension. It is fairly easy to verify the 3-dimensional case by

calculating the areas. In fact, I have since discovered that the formula for
the area of the sloping face appearedin 1910 in an old geometry book [3],
and that the Pythagorean generalization is not unknown to (some!)
statisticians,expressedin termsof projections.

The regular tetrahedronand triangle inequalities

In 1985, Murray Klamkin A
looked at the following geometric
configuration. Suppose we have a
regular tetrahedron ABCD (with
unit edges say) and a point P with
PA = a, PB = b, PC = c, and /
PD = d. (See Figure 3.) /
Klamkin felt that there should
be some relationship between the
numbersa, b, c and d, and managed B I
to show that the geometric situation FIGURE3
occurs if and only if
(a2 + b2 + c2 + d2)2 > 3(a4 + b4 + c4 + d4). (1)
Surprisingly,this result is relatedto the triangleinequality. Suppose that
a, b, c are side-lengthsof a triangle. Then
b + c > a, c + a > b, a+ b > c.
Assuming thata, b and c are positive, this is equivalentto
(b + c - a)(c + a - b)(a + b - c) > 0
and
(a + b + c) (b + c - a)(c + a - b)(a + b - c) > 0.
Multiplyingout, this gives
(a2 + +b2+ 42) > 2 a + b4 + c4), (2)
and the similaritybetween (1) and (2) is clear*.
What is not so clear is just why these inequalitiesoccur in such different
contexts. However, we can easily show thatthe triangleinequalityholds for
each three of the a, b, c and d in Figure 3. For example, considerb, c and d.
For fixed values of b and c, rotating APBC about BC shows that d is
maximal when P lies in the plane DBC, in the position where PBDC is a
quadrilateralwith diagonals PD and BC. Now applying to quadrilateral
PBDC the classical theoremof Ptolemy that 'the productof the diagonals is
less than the sum of the products of the opposite edges' gives
d. I < b. 1 + c. 1. This is the requiredtriangleinequality.
It is interestingthat using Heron'sformulafor the areaA of the triangle,(2) is equivalentto
16A2 > 0.
 IN ELEMENTARY
SOMERECENTDISCOVERIES GEOMETRY 393

This led Klamkinto consider

Problem 2. Suppose we are given n segments having lengths
al, a2, ... , an (n > 3), is there a simple condition which
implies that any three segmentsform the sides of a triangle?
Using mathematical induction and some calculation, Klamkin [4]
showed in 1987 that:
If a,, a2, ... , a arepositive andn > 3, and
(a,2 + a22 + ... + an2)2 > (n - 1)(al4 + a24 + ... an4),
then each tripletai, aj, ak (i ? j, j ? k, k ? i) gives lengths for the sides of
a triangle.
Question: Is it possible to find a condition that six segments can
be assembledto give a tetrahedron?

Points and lines in a triangle

The simple triangle has a surprisingly large number of interesting
properties. For example, it is known that the mediansAX, BY, CZ of AABC
meet in a common point, the centroid,M say (Figure4).
Noting that Area(AABX)= Area(AACX), and Area(IAMBX) =
Area(AMCX), it is easy to deduce that the three smaller triangles AMBC,
AMCAand AMABall have the same area. Now suppose that M is not the
centroid, but a point for which the three above triangles have the same
perimeter. Call such a point M an isoperimetricpoint of AABC.
A A

z y z y

B X C B X C
FIGURE4 FIGURE5

Problem 3. Does every triangle have an isoperimetricpoint? If

not, which triangles do? What propertiesdoes this isoperimetric
point have? How are the perimetersof the original triangle and
the smallertrianglerelated?
Notice the simple idea. Actually, the solution is quite complicated, as
Veldkamp [5] found in 1985. (Perimeter problems are traditionally
difficult!) For example, a triangle has an isoperimetricpoint if and only if
none of its angles exceed 2 arcsin4/5 - 106? 15' 37".
394 THEMATHEMATICAL
GAZE'I"
E

The concurrenceof the mediansis a special case of a more generalresult

about the cevians of a triangle. A cevian is defined to be a line segment
from a vertex of a triangle to the side opposite it. With the notation of
Figure 5, the classical theorem of Ceva (1678) states that AX, BY, CZ are
concurrentin point P if and only if
BX.CY.AZ
XC.YA.ZB
or
al .bl.cl *
=
1. (3)
a2.b2.c2
All of the nice concurrenceresults about medians, altitudes,angle bisectors
are special cases of this result.
|Problem 4. Can we generalize Ceva's theorem to three dimensions? |
Another 'obvious' generalisation! The answer was provided by Landy
[6] in 1988. The secret lies in finding the correct interpretationof Ceva's
theorem. Suppose that masses ml, m2, m3 are placed at the vertices A, B, C
respectively. Now let points X, Y, Z be placed at the centres of masses of
m2, m3; m3, ml; ml, m2 respectively.
TakingmomentsaboutX, Y,Z respectively,we require
aim2 = a2m3, bIm3 = b2ml, clml = c2m2.

Thus
a, m3 b, ml cl m)
a2 m2 b2 m3 c2 ml
and multiplication of these equations gives (3). In other words, Ceva's
theorem holds when and only when the points X, Y, Z occur as centres of
mass in the above way.
With the naturaldefinition of a cevian for a tetrahedron,the likely (and
correct)generalisationbecomes:
The four cevians of a tetrahedronare concurrentif and only if
we can assign masses to the vertices in such a way that each
cevian base point lies at the centre of mass of the surrounding
face.

Napoleon revisited
Sometimes a startlingnew proof is given for an old theorem. Take for
example the prettyresult attributed(probablyfalsely) to Napoleon:
Napoleon's Theorem. If equilateraltriangles are erected externally (or
internally) on the three sides of any triangle, then their centres form an
equilateraltriangle. (See Figure6.)
The traditional proof is not trivial, and begins by examining the
SOMERECENTDISCOVERIES
IN ELEMENTARY
GEOMETRY 395

circumcirclesof the external triangles. It is of interest in that it establishes

along the way that the lines AA', BB', CC' are concurrentin a point F, the
Fermat or Steiner point of AABC. B'
This is the point at which P lies
when the sum of the lengths C'
PA + PB + PC is minimal. A
However, in 1988, Rigby [7]
demonstrated a nice alternative
proof involving a tessellation of the
plane in which equilateraltriangles / / C
surround congruent (shaded)
triangles(Figure 7(a)).
In outline (see Figure 7(b),
which can be thought of as being
superimposedupon Figure 7(a)):
(1) The centres of the small
equilateral triangles of the A
tessellation form an equilateral
triangle lattice (unbroken FIGURE6
lines).
(2) The centres of the other equilateraltriangles of the tessellation lie at the
centres of the lattice triangles.
(3) Hence all the centres of the equilateral triangles form a smaller
equilateraltriangularlattice, and Napoleon'stheoremfollows.
Analogues of Napoleon's theorem can be derived when, for example,
similartrianglesare erected on the sides of the given triangle.
Question. What happens in Napoleon's theorem when the
original triangle degenerates to a line segment?

FIGURE
7(a) FIGURE7(b)
396 THEMATHEMATICAL
GAZETTE

FIGURE 8

Dissections
It is well known that a square can be dissected into a finite numberof
smaller squares,with no two of the smaller squaresbeing equal in size (see
Figure 8, where the numbersgive the side-lengths). The 1940 paper [8] is
quite difficult, but has a nice bibliographyof results up to that time. You
may like to think about the lowest possible numberof component squares
(in fact 21), and whetherthere is a 3-dimensionalanalogue of the problem.
In a differentdirection:
|Problem 5. Perhapsthere are generalisationsin the plane? l
The obvious candidate is the equilateral triangle: can an equilateral
trianglebe tiled by a finite numberof smaller unequalequilateraltriangles?
In 1948 Tutte [9] showed that the answer to this question is 'No', but more
recentlyin 1981 a strongerresultappeared:
No convex region can be tiled by a finite number of smaller
unequalequilateraltriangles(Buchman[10]).
In each of the above cases the tiling can take place if two equal equilateral
trianglesare allowed.
Finally, let us thinkof tiling a rectanglewith rectangles. (Thatshould be
simple!) If all the component rectangles have integer side lengths, then
clearly so does the large rectangle.
Problem 6. If each of the componentrectangleshas at least one
integer side length, what can be said aboutthe large rectangle?
SOMERECENTDISCOVERIES
IN ELEMENTARY
GEOMETRY 397

Put in this form it is clear what the 'expected' (and correct) answer is.
But it is the question which seems to me to be creative and imaginative.
Perhapsin our mathematicsteaching we should place less emphasis on the
answers, and more on the questions! If you are interested,Stan Wagon [11]
(1987) establishes the answer to this question in fourteen different ways!
And the large rectangledoes have at least one integer side length.

References
1. K. R. Parthasrathy,A generalization of Ceva's theorem to higher
dimension,AmericanMathematicalMonthly95, pp. 137-140 (1978).
2. I. Ward,The tritetrule, Math. Gaz. 79 (July 1995) pp. 380-382.
3. R. J. T. Bell, Coordinate geometry of three dimensions, Macmillan
(1910).
4. M. S. Klamkin, Simultaneous triangle inequalities, Mathematics
Magazine 60 (1987) pp. 236-237.
5. G. R. Veldkamp, The isoperimetric point and the point(s) of equal
detour in a triangle, American Mathematical Monthly, 92 (1985) pp.
546-558.
6. S. Landy, A generalization of Ceva's theorem to higher dimension,
AmericanMathematicalMonthly95 (1988) pp. 137-140.
7. J. F. Rigby, Napoleon revisited,Journal of Geometry33 (1988) pp. 129-
146.
8. R. L. Brooks, C. A. B. Smith, A. H. Stone, W. T. Tutte, The dissection
of rectangles into squares, Duke Mathematical Journal 7 (1940) pp.
312-340.
9. W. T. Tutte, The dissection of equilateral triangles into equilateral
triangles, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 44
(1948) pp. 463-482.
10. E. Buchman, The impossibility of tiling a convex region with unequal
equilateral triangles, American Mathematical Monthly 88 (1981) pp.
748-753.
11. S. Wagon, Fourteenproofs of a result abouttiling a rectangle,American
MathematicalMonthly94 (1987) pp. 601-617.
PAUL SCOTT
Departmentof Pure Mathematics, Universityof Adelaide,SouthAustralia5005

Failureof thepigeonholeprinciple?
BradleyJones,theworldNo. 19 fromCroydon,will be thelowestrankedplayer
in the 32-man field contestingthe televised phase of the Embassy World
Championship in Sheffield.
Hugh JoycePorteoussawthisconundrum
and 25 March1997.
in theGuardian,