MHB Necessity of Hypotenuse-Leg Theorem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tom555
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Theorem
AI Thread Summary
The Hypotenuse-Leg Theorem states that if two right triangles have congruent hypotenuses and one leg, then the triangles are congruent. While this is a sufficient condition for congruence, it is not necessary, as congruence requires all sides and angles to be equal. The discussion highlights that the theorem is a special case of the Angle-Side-Side (ASS) situation, which does not generally imply congruence. However, in right triangles, the theorem holds true due to the right angle being included. Therefore, while the condition is sufficient for congruence, it is not necessary in all cases.
Tom555
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
There's a theorem in Euclidean Geometry that says: "Let $\Delta$ and $\Delta'$ be two right triangles. If the hypotenuse and a leg of $\Delta$ has the same measure as the hypotenuse and a leg of $\Delta'$, then $\Delta\cong\Delta'$." Wikipedia says this is only a sufficient condition, by I don't see why it wouldn't be necessary as well. If $\Delta\cong\Delta'$, the by $SSS$ criterion, the two hypotenuses are congruent and a side of each. Is this wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Adam1729 said:
There's a theorem in Euclidean Geometry that says: "Let $\Delta$ and $\Delta'$ be two right triangles. If the hypotenuse and a leg of $\Delta$ has the same measure as the hypotenuse and a leg of $\Delta'$, then $\Delta\cong\Delta'$." Wikipedia says this is only a sufficient condition, by I don't see why it wouldn't be necessary as well. If $\Delta\cong\Delta'$, the by $SSS$ criterion, the two hypotenuses are congruent and a side of each. Is this wrong?
The reason that the sufficiency is stated as a theorem is that it is a special case of two triangles in which two sides and a non-included angle are the same for both triangles. This is sometimes referred to as an $A{S}S$ situation, and it does not in general imply congruence. But in this special case, where the non-included angle is a right angle, it is sufficient for congruence.

As for the necessity of the condition, if two triangles are congruent then all the angles and sides of one triangle must be the same as the angles and sides of the other one. So any such condition is always necessary for congruence.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Is it possible to arrange six pencils such that each one touches the other five? If so, how? This is an adaption of a Martin Gardner puzzle only I changed it from cigarettes to pencils and left out the clues because PF folks don’t need clues. From the book “My Best Mathematical and Logic Puzzles”. Dover, 1994.
Back
Top