Math 432-2: Assignment # 2

Solutions

1. (a) The statement [P or Q] is true i at least one of P or Q is true. Therefore the negation is true i they are both not true: [P or Q] = [ P & Q]. (b) The statement [P & Q] is true i P is true and Q is not true. Therefore the negation is that either P is not true, or Q is true, or both. That is, [P & Q] = [ P or Q]. (c) From Logic Rule #4, we have [H = C] = [H & C]. Taking the negation of both sides, we get [H = C] = [ H or C], using part (b) above. 2. (a) The negation of All right angles are congruent to each other is there exist right angles which are not congruent to each other. (b) The negation of Euclids Parallel postulate is there exists a line l and there exists a point P not on l such that there is not a unique line through P parallel to l. Note that there could be more than one such line or no such lines. 3. Let P be a point. By I.3, there exist 3 non-collinear points A, B, and C. If P is one of these points, (say A), then AB and AC are two distinct lines through P = A. If P is not one of these three points, then consider the lines l = P A, m = P B, and n = P C. There are three lines through P . At least two of these three lines are distinct, because if they were all the same, then A, B, and C would be collinear, which is a contradiction. 4. There are three cases (other solutions are possible): (a) Suppose we want I.1 and I.2 to hold, but not I.3. This can be accomplished by having a single line with exactly two distinct points on it, and nothing else. (b) Suppose we want I.1 and I.3 to hold, but not I.2. We can take the three point model of incidence geometry considered in class, and add to it a single line which contains no points. Now I.1 and I.3 continue to hold, but I.2 fails. (c) Suppose we want I.2 and I.3 to hold, but not I.1. We can take just three points, with no lines at all. (In this case I.2 holds automatically because there are no lines.) If you dont like this, here is another one: take 3 points with no lines going through any of them, and add to this a single line containing 2 other points. 5. In all these examples, all three incidence axioms are satised. Recall that in a model, we have given meaning to the undened terms, so we can check whether or not the axioms are true with these meanings. We use facts from two and three dimensional analytic geometry, since this is the language that these models are described in. (a) The points are lines through the origin, and lines are planes through the origin, with incidence of point on line being the usual incidence of line on plane. For 1

I.1: this gets translated to given any two distinct lines through the origin, they lie on a unique plane through the origin. This is true (can be dened using the cross product, if you wish.) For I.2: this gets translated to any plane through the origin contains at least two distinct lines through the origin. This is also true, in fact there are innitely many such lines. For I.3: this gets translate to there exist three distinct lines through the origin which do not lie on the same plane. Also true, take for example the three coordinate axes. Finally, this model has the elliptic parallel property, because any two distinct lines, which are distinct planes through the origin, interesect in a line, which is a point in our model. So there are no parallel lines. (b) The points are points inside a circle, and the lines are straight segments whose endpoints are on the circle. In this case we are really taking just a subset of the x-y-plane, the interior of a circle. The three axioms I.1, I.2, and I.3 are trivially satised since they are satised in any piece of the x-y-plane. This model has the hyperbolic parallel property. Given a chord of a circle and a point P inside the circle which is not on the chord, there are innitely many chords through P which do not intersect our given chord. (c) This model is isomorphic to the model in part (a). Given a line through the origin, intersecting it with a sphere centred at the origin gives a pair of anti-podal points. This gives a one-to-one correspondence between lines through the origin and pairs of anti-podal points. Similarly, given a plane through the origin, intersecting it with the sphere gives a great circle (equator). Again, this is a one-to-one correspondence between planes through the origin and great circles. It is clear that these correspondences preserve the incidence relation. Hence this model is isomorphic to (a) and is a model for incidence geometry with the elliptic parallel property. 6. The points of M are the lines of M, and the lines of M are the points of M. We want to show that M is also a projective plane. We need to show that it satises I.1, I.3, strengthened I.2, and the elliptic parallel property. By interchanging points and lines, these become statements in the model M which must be veried. For I.1, this translates to: given two distinct lines, there exists a unique point which lies on both of them. Since M has the elliptic parallel property, any two distinct lines intersect. Their intersection point is unique by Proposition 2.1. For I.3, this translates to: there exist three distinct lines which are not concurrent. This is exactly Proposition 2.2. For the elliptic parallel property, this translates to: given any two distinct points, there is a line which is incident with both of them. This is just I.1 for M. Finally, for the strengthened I.2, this translates to: any point has three distinct lines through it. Given a point P , we know from Proposition 2.5 that there exist two distinct lines l and m through P . By I.2, there exist at least two points on each line (in fact in this case at least three, although we dont need that yet). So let A be on l and B be on m, both distinct from P . By I.1 there is a (unique) line n through A and B. But now by strengthened I.2, this line n contains a third point C. Then l, m, and P C are three lines through P . These are distinct, because if not, then A, B, and C, would not be distinct, which is a contradiction.