Can someone explain this proof to me?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter WiFO215
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Explain Proof
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a proof involving the concurrency of lines formed by extending sides of two triangles. Participants seek clarification on the proof's details, particularly regarding the use of coordinates and the concept of a reference triangle.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof involving two triangles and their extended lines, questioning the meaning and implications of the coordinates used.
  • Another participant expresses confusion about the reference triangle and the specific coordinates assigned to points A1, B1, C1, and V.
  • A third participant notes that the proof is found in a geometry book aimed at high school students, expressing disbelief at its complexity.
  • Some participants suggest that the proof employs trilinear coordinates, while others propose that it actually uses barycentric coordinates, leading to further exploration of these concepts.
  • There is a suggestion to look for additional resources on trilinear and barycentric coordinates, including references to specific books and online archives.
  • Several participants acknowledge their own lack of understanding regarding trilinear coordinates and express a desire to learn more about the proof and its underlying principles.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that the proof is complex and requires further explanation. However, there is no consensus on the specific coordinate system being used, with differing views on whether it is trilinear or barycentric coordinates.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the definitions and applications of trilinear and barycentric coordinates, indicating that these concepts may not be fully understood within the context of the proof.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in geometry, particularly those exploring proofs involving concurrency and coordinate systems, may find this discussion relevant.

WiFO215
Messages
417
Reaction score
1
I posted this in the geometry subforum, but I think that might have been the wrong place to post this.

Given two triangles with vertices A1, B1, C1 and A2, B2, C2 respectively. A1A2, B1B2, C1C2 are extended to meet at a point V say. Now, B1C1 and B2C2 are extended to meet at L, A1B1 and A2B2 meet at N and A1C1 and A2C2 meet at M. Prove that L, M and N are concurrent.

Proof (as given in text):

Let A1B1C1 be the reference triangle and V be the unit point (1,1,1). A2 is on the join of A1(1,0,0) and V(1,1,1), so it can be taken as (1+p,1,1). Similarly, the point B2 is given by (1,1+q,1) and C2 by (1,1,1+r).

Now, the line B2C2 is

\left|\stackrel{\stackrel{x}{1}}{1}\stackrel{\stackrel{y}{1+q}}{1}\stackrel{\stackrel{z}{1}}{1+r} \right| = 0.


The point L is given by x = 0, y{1-(1+r)} + z{1 - (1+q)} = 0

i.e. x=0, \frac{y}{q} + \frac{z}{r} = 0

Therefore, L lies on the line \frac{x}{p}+ \frac{y}{q}+ \frac{z}{r} = 0. By symmetry, so do M and N.

Hence proved


From start to finish, I can't get it. Can someone please explain to me what all this means?

For the diagram that goes with the proof, please refer to my topic in the geometry section

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=345248
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Hi anirudh215! :smile:
anirudh215 said:
Let A1B1C1 be the reference triangle and V be the unit point (1,1,1). A2 is on the join of A1(1,0,0) and V(1,1,1), so it can be taken as (1+p,1,1). Similarly, the point B2 is given by (1,1+q,1) and C2 by (1,1,1+r).

https://www.physicsforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=21094&d=1255422239"

Sorry, I don't understand this at all :redface:

how are A B and C (1,0,0) etc? and why is V (1,1,1)? and what's a "reference triangle"? :confused:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Exactly what I want to know! I saw this in a geometry book entitled "Teaching of Higher Geometry in schools - A report for the Mathematical Association" Published by Bell and Sons. I've been blinking over many proofs in this text. What gets me down is it says it's for high school students!
 
mathworld and archive.org

hmm … that's at http://openlibrary.org/b/OL6159907M/teaching_of_higher_geometry_in_schools", but with no preview … why are you looking at a book published in 1953? :confused:

This proof seems to be using trilinear coordinates … see Eric W. Weisstein's http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ReferenceTriangle.html" :smile:

You can find downloadable books on "trilinear coordinates" (or any subject!) by doing a search at archive.org … see http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=trilinear AND mediatype:texts"
 
Last edited by a moderator:


tiny-tim said:
hmm … that's at http://openlibrary.org/b/OL6159907M/teaching_of_higher_geometry_in_schools", but with no preview … why are you looking at a book published in 1953? :confused:

Heh. I found it on my prof's shelf, and while he made me wait in his office (as all professors do), I picked up this one and began reading it. It had a few very cool proofs. This one was so intriguing, I just HAD TO find out about it.

So I did find out about it. It's not trilinear co ordinates but is something that is called barycentric co-ordinates. If you are also interested, you can find out more about it from H.M. Coxeter, Introduction to Geometry, page 216. This is damn interesting!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
Oops. Well, I don't know what trilinear coordinates are either, so I thought you'd made a mistake. Sorry. But that's basically it. Now how does one explain the problem?
 
anirudh215 said:
Now how does one explain the problem?

erm :redface: … one (ie you) looks at mathworld and wikipedia and the archive.org free books until one has it! :wink:

and then one explains it to everyone here! :smile:
 
Will do! :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K