PICTURES BEFORE PROOFS MAY MISLEAD

We began class by returning to our discussion of the Plane Separation Theorem B-4:
The problem presented on September 23rd was to evaluate if the line separation property is
independent of axioms I – 1- 3 and B – 1-3.
We constructed two separate models.
(1) the ordinary Cartesian plane,
In this model we know the Line Separation Theorem 2-11 holds from our previous
proofs.
(2) a Cartesian plane with a twist.
This scenario was defined as points (x, y), lines ax+by+c=0 with a new between defined
for points A=(0,0), P=(1,0) and B=(2,0).

Between is equal to XoYoZ whenever X≠A, Y≠P and Z≠B.

When X=A, Y=P and Z=B, then PoAoB

We began our discussion by considering the point D=(-1,0)

Is D on AB or AP or AB ? We determined that our picture provided misleading insight and
proofs should be done prior to evaluating a drawing.

Does D lie on AB ? The definition of a line is given in the scenario as ax+by+c=0. Using points
A and B we can determine that line AB is defined by y=0. Because point D satisfies the
condition, y=0, D lies on AB

Does D lie on AP ? AP = C : AoPoC  U AP

By evaluating the coordinates of D we can determine that PoAoD so D  of AP

Does D lie on AB ? AB = C : AoBoC  U AB

Again, we evaluate the location of point D relative to A and B and determine that DoAoB which
does not appear in our definition of AB so D  of AB

According to Line Separation Theorem 2.11 it should be true that AB = AP U AB but we

found that D  of AP or of AB therefore the line separation property does not hold in the
twisted Cartesian plane.

We then continued on in our proofs of between axioms:

Proposition 2.15: Let l be a line, A a point on l, and B a point not on l. Then every point on
AB except A, lies on the same side of l as B.
Our discussion led us to evaluate several ways to approach this proof, in the end we determined
that the best starting position was to state:
Let C be any point on AB which is not A and
AB = C : A * B * C U C : A * C * B U A, B
 then by Lemma 2.6, (If C*B*A and l is any line passing through A that is distinct from AC
then B and C are on the same side of l (Note I have changed the letters to fit the set up of the
proposition)) we can determine that A*C*B or A*B*C. Both of these possibilities have point C
on the same side of l as B. That C cannot be A is given in the proposition. If C = B then by
definition 2.1 B&C are also both on the same side therefore we have proven proposition 2.15 that
every point C lies on the same side of l as B.

Definition 2.16: If C*A*B then AC and AB are called opposite rays.

If C*A*B and AC = P : A * C * P U P : A * P * C U A, C and

AB = P : A * B * P U P : A * P * B U A, B then they are opposite rays.
Although in most proofs pictures can be misleading, in definitions a drawing often provides
clarification.

Definition 2:17: An angle with vertex A is the union of point A and two distinct,
nonopposite rays, AB and AC . We use the notation (sorry if someone can help me, I would
love to find out how to put an angle symbol in)  BAC or  CAB.
We noticed the key words in the definition: vertex A, distinct nonopposite rays and that A must
be in the center of the angle name. A, B and C can not be collinear points or else they would
create opposite rays as determined in Definition 2:16.

Definition 2:18: If two angles, BAD and CAD have a common side AD and the two
other sides, AB and AC form opposite rays, the angles are called supplements of each
other, or supplementary angles.
We again noticed the key words in the definition: AB and AC must be opposite rays as defined
in definition 2.16, The two angles BAD and CAD must have a common side formed by AD .
Notice in the picture that AC and AB are opposite rays and AD is shared by both BAD and
CAD.

Definition 2:19: A point D is in the interior of the BAC if:

*D and C are on the same side of line AB, and
*D and B are on the same side of line AC.

This definition was best understood by drawing an BAC and examining the possible
placements for point D. A dashed line was added to the drawing of BAC to extend AB into
AB . The first condition in the definition restricts D to the same side of AB as point C. This
area is shaded by large dots. AC was then extended forming AC . The second condition in the
definition restricts D to the same side of AC as point B. This area is shaded with squiggly lines.
The area shaded by both large dots and squiggly lines which is bounded by AB and AC by
definition is the interior of the BAC and D may reside anywhere within this bounded area.

With these definitions in mind we returned to proofs.

Proposition 2.20: Let BAC be an angle and D a point lying on BC . Then D is in the
interior of BAC iff B*D*C

No picture will be provided as we have determined pictures before proofs may mislead.

IFF is the identifying phrase that warns us that our proof must be evaluated in two ways.
1) Let D be a point in the interior of BAC on li BC , then B*D*C because of definition
2.19. D and C are on the same side of AB , and D and B are on the same side of AC .
2) Let D be any point on BC . Lemma 2.7 says If X and Y are distinct points on the same
side of a line l and line XY intersects l at a point Z, then X*Y*Z or Y*X*Z. We have
two conditions that must be meet so we start by placing D on the same side of AC as B,
Lemma 2.7 then says that the order must be D*B* C or B* D*C and we then place D on
the same side of AB as C, Lemma 2.7 says that the order must be D * C * B or C * D *
B. From B-3 we recognize that only one element can be between so we conclude that the
order must by B* D*C and C*D*B which proves that iff B*D*C, D is in the interior of
BAC.

In doing the following proof it was noted that often the reuse of A, B and C as point names
are confusing and we should eliminate this confusion by restating propositions used in the
context of the proof with X, Y and Z.