POINTS, LINES CONNECTED WITH A TRIANGLE 1.

5 The Steiner-Lehmus theorem There are a number of geometric problems that seem to exert a peculiar fascination on anybody who happens to stumble on them. This appears to have been a characteristic of geometry even in ancient times. One has only to recall the three famous problems of antiquity-the duplication of the cube, the trisection of the general angle, and the squaring of the circle. Attempts to solve these problems led to the development of many new branches of mathematics. Even now, there are would-bemathematicians who send in "solutions" for these problems and dare the reader to prove them wrong. One theorem that always excites interest may be stated thus: 1.51. THEOREM Any triangle that has two equal angle bisechs (each measured from a vertex to the opposite side) is isosceles. In 1840, this theorem was sent in a letter from C. L. Lehmus to C. Sturm, with a request for a pure geometric proof. Sturm mentioned it to a number of mathematicians. One of the first to answer the challenge was the great Swiss geometer Jacob Steiner, and it became known as the Steiner-Lehmus theorem. Papers on it appeared in various journals in 1842, 1844, 1848, almost every year from 1854 till 1864, and with a good deal of regularity during the next hundred years. One of the simplest proofs makes use of the following two lemmas. LEMMA 1 1. I f two chords o f a circle subtend diferent acute angles 1.5 at points on the circle, the smaller angle belongs to the shorter chord. PROOF. TWOequal chords subtend equal angles a t the center and equal angles (half as big) a t suitable points on the circumference. Of two unequal chords, the shorter, being farther from the center, subtends a smaller angle there and consequently a smaller acute angle a t the circumference. LEMMA 1.512. If a triangle has two different angles, the smaller angle has the longer internal bisector. [5, p. 72.1 PROOF. Let ABC be the triangle, with B < C as in Figure 1.5A;t let B M and CN bisect the angles B and C. We wish to prove that B M > CN. Take M' on BM so that LM'CN = #B. Since this is equal to LM'BN, the four points N, B, C, M lie on a circle. '

t Here and in what follows, we often denote the angle at B simply by the letter B.

<

3(B

+ C)
<

<

3(A

+ B + C),
<
90'.

L CBN

LM'CB

By Lemma 1.511, CN

<

M'B. Hence BM

>

BM'

>

CN.

PROOP THE THEOREM. I t often happens that a theorem can be exOF pressed in an equivalent "contrapositive" form. For instance, instead of saying all men are mortal we can just as well say immortals we not men. Instead of proving Theorem 1.51 itself, it will sate for us to prove that if, in AABC, B # C, then BM # CN. But this is an immediate consequence of Lemma 1.512.
Archibald Henderson wrote one of the many biographies of Bernard Shaw, and also a tract on The twenty-seven lines upon the cubic surface. In his paper, The Lehmus-Steiner-Terquem fwoblem in global survey (Scripta Mathematica, 21, 1955, pp. 223232, 309-312) he attributes a proof resembling ours to Lehmus himself (1850). The idea of replacing the theorem by a strengthened contrapositive appears in a paper by Victor ThCbault (Mathesis, 44, 1930, p. 97), who proved Lemma 1.512
,,nctl..
, c

nh-..n

n-A

t h n m rlnrl..mrl 'Pl-nn-m

1 C1

oc n

((rn-~llo-..**

16

POINTS, LINES CONNECTED WITH A TRIANGLE

Henderson seems to have been slightly unhappy about Lehmus's proof, and about the earlier proof by Steiner, because they are not "direct". He would prefer to assume that BM = CN without considering the situation when B # C. Most of the published proofs [e.g. 5, p. 731 are likewise indirect. Several allegedly direct proofs [e.g. 6, Answers to the Exercises, p. 21 have been proposed; but each of them is really an indirect proof in disguise. T o see that this is the case, recall that only the very most elementary theorems are in practice proved completely. All the rest are proved with the aid of other theorems, already known: a whole chain of theorems going right back to the axioms. A proof cannot properly claim to be direct if any one of these auxiliary theorems has an indirect proof. Now, some of the simplest and most basic theorems have indirect proofs: consequently, if we insisted on complete directness, our store of theorems would be reduced to the merest trivialities. I s this observation any cause for sorrow? In the words of the great English mathematician, G. H. Hardy [IS, p. 341: "Reduclio ad absurdurn, which Euclid loved so much, is one of a mathematician's finest weapons. I t is a far finer gambit than any chess gambit: a chess player may offer the sacrifice of a pawn or even a piece, but a mathematician offers the game."

EXERCISES

f 1. Let BM and CN be external bisectors o the angles B = 12' and C = 132' of a special triangle ABC, each terminated at the opposite side. Without using trigonometric functions, compare the lengths of the angle bisectors. Bottemat). (0.
2. Where does our proofeof Theorem 1.51 break down if we try to apply it to Bottema's triangle (in which nobody could deny that B < C ) ?
3.

Use Exercise 7 of Section 1.3 to obtain a "direct" proof of the SteinerLehmus theorem.

1.6

The orthic triangle

A good deal can be learned from inspection of Figure 1.6A, which shows an acute-angled triangle ABC, its circumcenter 0, its orthocenter H, and its orthic triangle DEF. Let us explain our reasons for

t See Archibald Henderson, Scripfa Mathemaficcr 21

(1956), pp. 309-310.