What Are the Limitations of Rigid Motion in a Hilbert Plane?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dismo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Geometry Motion
Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
2 replies · 3K views
dismo
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Working in a Hilbert plane, show that any rigid motion that fixes at least three noncollinear points must be the identity.

I am certain that I can claim that:
(i) any translation of the plane will fix none of the points
(ii) any rotation will fix a single point
(iii) any reflection will fix only the points on the line about which the plane is reflected

The trouble is I don't know how to prove that no composition of these could fix only three points in the plane...

Where do I go next?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm unfamiliar with the axioms of a Hilbert plane. If this question were posed in the context of an ordinary Euclidean plane, however, this is how I would approach it. Rigid motions preserve distances (i.e., the distance between points [tex]f(a)[/tex] and [tex]f(b)[/tex] is the same as that between [tex]a[/tex] and [tex]b[/tex], where [tex]f[/tex] is a rigid motion). Given a two points [tex]A[/tex] and [tex]B[/tex] and a third point [tex]X[/tex] not on [tex]\overline{AB}[/tex], there exists exactly one other point [tex]Y \neq X[/tex] such that [tex]d(A,Y) = d(A,X)[/tex] and [tex]d(B,Y) = d(B,X)[/tex] (where [tex]d(\; , \;)[/tex] denotes the distance function). Furthermore, [tex]Y = r_{AB}(X)[/tex], the reflection of [tex]X[/tex] about [tex]\overline{AB}[/tex]. If [tex]X[/tex] is on [tex]\overline{AB}[/tex], then [tex]X[/tex] is the unique point in the plane satisfying these equations. (Neither of these assertions is hard to prove.)

Let [tex]f[/tex] be a rigid motion fixing the three noncollinear points [tex]A,B,C[/tex]. From the last observation, we know that [tex]f[/tex] fixes all of [tex]\overline{AB}, \overline{AC}[/tex], and [tex]\overline{BC}[/tex]. Let [tex]X[/tex] be a point not on any of these lines. Suppose [tex]f(X) \neq X[/tex]; then, by distance conservation, we must have [tex]f(X) = r_{AB}(X) = r_{AC}(X) = r_{BC}(X)[/tex] simultaneously, a contradiction since (by assumption) [tex]\overline{AB} \neq \overline{AC} \neq \overline{BC}[/tex].
 
A Hilbert Plane is just a Euclidean Plane, but without the Parallel Axiom and the Circle–Circle Intersection Property.

So, yeah, your proof works.