Undergrad Prove that a triangle with lattice points cannot be equilateral

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on proving that a triangle with lattice points cannot be equilateral. The user begins by defining three lattice points and applying the distance formula to establish equal side lengths. Through algebraic manipulation, they conclude that for the triangle to exist, one of the coordinates must equal another, resulting in a degenerate triangle. The conversation also touches on using a general approach with lattice points, leading to contradictions in the derived equations. Ultimately, the analysis supports the assertion that an equilateral triangle cannot be formed with lattice points.
JoeAllen
Messages
5
Reaction score
1
I assumed three points for a triangle P1 = (a, c), P2 = (c, d), P3 = (b, e)

and of course:
a, b, c, d, e∈Z
Using the distance formula between each of the points and setting them equal:
\sqrt { (b - a)^2 + (e - d)^2 } = \sqrt { (c - a)^2 + (d - d)^2 } = \sqrt { (b - c)^2 + (e - d)^2 }(e+d)2 = (c-a)2 - (b-a)2
(e+d)2 = (c-a)2 - (b-c)2

c2 - 2ac - b2 +2ab = -2ac + a2 - b2 + 2bc
c2 + 2ab = a2 + 2bc
c(c - 2b) = a(a - 2b)

Thus, for this to be true, a = c. But in this example, the distance between a and c would be 0. Thus, not a triangle and certainly not an equilateral triangle.

Where did I go wrong here? I'm bored waiting for Calculus II in the Fall and I'm going through Courant's Differential and Integral Calculus on my free time until then (Fall term probably starting in August/September, so I'm not worried if it takes a few months to get comfortable with Courant - Calculus I has been a breeze since I already knew most of the content before taking it).
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
As for 2D lattice we can make one of the lattice points is (0,0) without losing generality.
Say other points are ##(n_1,n_2),(m_1,m_2)##
n_1^2+n_2^2=A
m_1^2+m_2^2=A
(n_1-m_1)^2+(n_2-m_2)^2=A
where A is square of the side length. You will find contradiction in this set of formla.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
965
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 125 ·
5
Replies
125
Views
20K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K