An

Exploration
of the
Pythagorean Theorem

Sam Otten
MTH 210A
W04
 An Exploration of the Pythagorean Theorem
More than two thousand years ago, a scholar wrote the treatise that has become a
foundation of mathematical thinking to this day. The time was near the beginning of the third
century before the common era (B.C.E.), and Euclid, after being schooled in Athens by students
of Plato, went on to become a scholar and a teacher in the city of Alexandria, Egypt.6 Euclid set
to work writing his masterpiece – the Elements. The Elements is a scientific effort in thirteen
volumes that contains the basis for elementary geometry, number theory, proportional
representations, the theory of limits, and offers a proof and analysis of the Pythagorean Theorem
(which we will discuss in greater depth throughout this paper).3 While Elements is not
completely his own composition, Euclid did the work of gathering past mathematical results and
presenting them in a logical and scientifically rigorous fashion.6
The Elements is organized progressively, wherein results are drawn from earlier
definitions, postulates, and previously proved theorems. With this in mind, Euclid started by
explicitly defining terms and operations that would be used in his writing. 3 He also described
five postulates that are the basis of what is now referred to as Euclidean Geometry; they are
1) A line can be drawn through two points,
2) A segment of a line can be extended indefinitely,
3) A circle can be drawn around a point given a radius,
4) All right angles are equal to one another,
5) If two lines both intersect a third line, and if the sum of the interior angles on
one side of the transversal is less than 180°, then the first two lines will
eventually intersect on that side.3
Some interesting points about these postulates are that (4) can be replaced by rewriting (1) to say
“a unique line,” and the fifth postulate of Euclid has not been proven and is therefore assumed in
Euclidean Geometry but it is not assumed in the discipline known as Non-Euclidean Geometry.3
The first of the thirteen books of Euclid’s Elements deals with the fundamentals of triangles,
rectangles, and parallelograms. It offers formulas and comparisons for the areas of these basic
figures and the book ends with arguably the most important finding in mathematical geometry –
the Pythagorean Theorem.3

2
 Euclid was not the first to discover the Geometric Representation of Py th. Theorem

relationship between the sides of a right triangle. There

is evidence from ancient Babylonian culture as well as
some Eastern Civilizations which indicates they were
aware of the fact that the sum of the areas of the squares A

built on the legs of a right triangle is equal to the area of c

b
a square built on the remaining side.8 The Greek
a
mathematician Pythagoras (after whom the theorem is C B

named) receives popular credit for the finding because

his school managed to write it down and offer a proof
in the middle of the sixth century B.C.E.8 Today, the
relationship between the legs of a right triangle (a, b)
and its hypotenuse (c) is familiar to everyone who has been in a middle or high school geometry
class: a 2 + b 2 = c 2 . There are many proofs of this theorem, from such sources as Pythagoras,
Euclid, Bhaskara (a 12th Century Hindu mathematician), Leonardo Da Vinci, and even former
United States President James Garfield.2,7,8 A proof will be included in this paper to help us gain
insight into the Pythagorean Theorem.

Theorem: If ∆ABC is a right triangle with legs AC and CB and hypotenuse AB , then
the
sum of the squares of the two legs is equal to the square of the hypotenuse.

π
Proof: Let ∆ABC have angles of θ, φ, and , making it a right triangle. Let us
2
also draw in the line segment CD that is perpendicular to the hypotenuse. We now have three
right triangles: ∆ABC , ∆ACD , and ∆CBD .
A
θ C
D
A
θ

ϕ ϕ
C B D C D B

3
By the theorem which states that the sum of the angles of a triangle equals π, we can conclude

π
from ∆ABC that θ + φ + = π . Looking at ∆ACD we see that two of the angles are defined,
2

π
namely θ and . By the theorem mentioned above we know that the sum of all three angles
2
must equal π and it can be concluded that the third angle is φ. Similarly, two angles from

π
∆CBD are known to be φ and while the third is determinedly θ. We see that the three
2
triangles have the same angle measurements which means, by the Angle-Angle-Angle Similarity
Theorem from Euclidean Geometry, that they are similar triangles.

Applying the Fundamental Theorem of Similar Triangles we know that the following ratios hold:

AC = AD and CB = DB .
AB AC AB CB

By cross-multiplying each ratio relationship we see that

AC ⋅ AC = AD ⋅ AB and CB ⋅ CB = DB ⋅ AB .

At this point we will combine the two equations above by adding them, which gives us

AC ⋅ AC + CB ⋅ CB = AD ⋅ AB + DB ⋅ AB .

We will now rewrite the left-hand side using power notation and we will factor out the AB
from both terms of the right-hand side, resulting in

( AC ) + (CB )
2 2
(
= AB AD + DB ).

The combination of the two line segments AD and DB equals the line segment AB ,

therefore

( AC ) + (CB )
2 2
= AB( ) 2

4
 Distance Formula

x2 +y2 where AC and CB are the legs of a right triangle and AB is

y
the hypotenuse. This proves that the sum of the squares of the
legs of a right triangle is equal to the square of its hypotenuse.2,4,7
x
‫ٱ‬

A ltitudes of T riangles
This result has become one of the most fruitful in the field
of mathematics. The Pythagorean Theorem is the basis for the
distance formula in Euclidean geometry.8 It provides the means

c for determining the distance between any two points when given

b2
their horizontal and vertical components. The theorem can also
c 2-
4
b be used to calculate lengths of inclines, the length of rectangular
2 diagonals, and the altitude of triangles which then leads to
triangular areas.7,8 The trigonometric identity sin 2 x + cos 2 x = 1
has its roots in the Pythagorean Theorem as well, applying the theorem to points on the unit
circle. These applications, along with countless others, are immeasurably useful in geometry,
trigonometry, graphical algebra, physics, engineering, cartography, navigation,
and graphic design.
Thus far our interpretation of the Pythagorean Theorem has been strictly two-
dimensional. Does the Pythagorean Theorem extend into higher dimensions? This is a question
that mathematicians have been contemplating for centuries. In his 1673 work Aritmetika, a
French mathematician by the name of Pierre de Fermat offered the following conjecture about
the integral generalization of the Pythagorean Theorem into higher dimensions:

It is impossible to partition a cube into two cubes, or a biquadrate into two biquadrates, and in general any
power greater than the second into two powers with the same exponent.3

This is known as Fermat’s Last Theorem because the mathematician failed to prove his
conjecture, claiming the “margin of my notebook is too small to contain” the proof.1 This claim
by Fermat essentially says that the Pythagorean Theorem only applies to squares – the second
power. Scholars realized this limitation on Pythagoras’ theorem would be a vital piece of
information and the search for a proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem began. Before World War 1
there was a reward offered to anyone who could supply a valid proof of the theorem, but

5
mathematicians still came up empty.3 Proofs existed concerning the third, fourth, and fifth
powers thanks to Euler, Fermat, and Legendre respectively; but Fermat’s claim was for all
powers greater than two and the few sample proofs that existed did not suffice. 1 The scholarly
world became doubtful, and in 1984 the Kluwer Encyclopædia of Mathematics cited a strong
possibility that a proof did not exist to be found.3
In 1993, after decades of hard work by countless minds, mathematical history was made.
Andrew Wiles of Princeton University announced that he had proven Fermat’s Last Theorem to
be true.1 Wiles implemented the ‘proof by contradiction’ argument form. He used two
previously proven results related to the theorem and, assuming Fermat’s Last Theorem was false,
showed that while one held true the other could not – a contradiction. Wiles then concluded that
his original assumption must have been false and therefore Fermat’s Last Theorem was true. 1
While this brief summary of Wiles’ work may not seem too extraordinary, keep in mind that it
required 200 pages of rigorous mathematical manipulations and had eluded mathematicians for
hundreds of years.1
What does it mean for Fermat’s Last Theorem to hold true? It can be viewed as a
limitation on the generalization of the Pythagorean Theorem. Algebraically it means that there
are no integral solutions for the equation a n + b n = c n when n > 2. 3 Geometrically it means that
an integral square (a two-dimensional object) can be divided into two smaller integral squares as
Pythagoras’ Theorem illustrates, but an integral cube cannot be divided into two smaller integral
cubes, nor can any similar object in any higher dimension. Notice that Fermat’s Last Theorem
applies only to integral values of a, b, and c, indicating the result is essentially contained within
the realm of algebraic number theory.5 Therefore, the proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem does not
remove all possibilities for the generalization of Pythagoras’ Theorem.
In their 2003 work, Putz and Sipka were able to generalize the Pythagorean Theorem by
remaining in two dimensions and by taking a geometric rather than algebraic approach. They
realized that the truth of Fermat’s Last Theorem demonstrates that the exponent of the
Pythagorean Theorem cannot be generalized; instead, they generalized the shape that is formed
using the sides of a right triangle.5 Earlier it was discussed and illustrated that the Pythagorean
Theorem can be thought of as the equality of squares built on the sides of a right triangle. Putz
and Sipka take this further and show that “the area of a polygon constructed on the hypotenuse of

6
a right triangle is the sum of the areas of similar polygons constructed…on the other two sides.”
(They were, of course, not the first to make this generalization, as they point out in their writing.)
To prove that the area of any polygon built on the hypotenuse of a right triangle is equal
to the sum of the areas of similar polygons built on the legs of the same right triangle, Putz and
Sipka incorporated the use of a lemma. Before we state the lemma, let us think of two similar
right triangles with ratio k. This means if the area of the original right triangle is calculated by

b ⋅h
, then the similar right triangle would have an area of
( kb )( kh )
or a factor of k 2
2 2
compared to the original area. This intuitively leads us to the lemma used by Putz and Sipka,
which was the fact that two polygons, P and P ′, which are similar by a factor of k will have

the following area relationship: A( P ) = k 2 A( P ′). 5 They proved this using Heron’s formula to
first show that the relationship holds for triangles, and then they demonstrated that any polygon
can be triangulated so that its area is the sum of the areas of triangles.
Shape-Generalization of Pyth. Theorem

1
3

3
2
2

A(1)+A(2) = A(3)

Given a right triangle, geometrically similar figures can be drawn on each side.
Assuming the original figure is the polygon built around the hypotenuse c, the polygons drawn

a b
on the legs a and b are said to be similar with a length-ratio of and respectively because
c c

a b
⋅ c = a and ⋅ c = b. Letting A( R ) represent the area of the region R, and letting P3 be the
c c

polygon built on the hypotenuse and P1 , P2 be similar polygons built on a and b, Putz and
Sipka used their lemma and were able to show that

7
 2 2
a b  a2 + b2
A( P1 ) + A( P2 ) =   A( P3 ) +   A( P3 ) = A( P3 ).
c c c2

a2 + b2
It has already been proven in this paper that a 2 + b 2 = c 2 , so it holds true that is 1.
c2

Simplification then results in

A( P1 ) + A( P2 ) = A( P3 )

and it becomes clear that the area of a polygon with one side the hypotenuse of a right triangle is
equal to the sum of the areas of similar polygons built on the other two sides of the same right
triangle.5 Further examination also shows that areas of circles maintain the Pythagorean
relationship when built around the legs of a right triangle because circles can be viewed as “a
limiting process using polygonal approximations.”5 Therefore, while the truth of Fermat’s Last
Theorem limits the generalization of the exponent in Pythagoras’ Theorem, Putz and Sipka were
successful in their generalization of the area equality between non-square similar figures
constructed on the sides of a two-dimensional right triangle.
We return now to where we started. More than two thousand years ago a brilliant man is
writing the treatise of his field. The theorems that Euclid offered in his Elements, the logical
approach with which he developed them, and the expansiveness of the topics that he covered has
been and will continue to be a foundation for the scientific field of mathematics. The
Pythagorean Theorem is a perfect case study for Euclid’s contribution to mathematical thinking
and applications. Like much of his work, Euclid did not discover the Pythagorean Theorem, but
he garnered its truth and placed it in a framework of logical definitions, postulations, and
conclusions, making it even more potent. The importance of the theorem in today’s world is
immeasurable as it reaches thoroughly through many disciplines. Also, like much of his work,
Euclid’s discussion and presentation of the Pythagorean Theorem has sparked mathematical
thinking and promoted novel research to the present day. Fermat, Wiles, Putz, Sipka, and
countless other mathematicians and thinkers become connected to Euclid (and further to
Pythagoras) as they work to generalize and explore all implications of the Pythagorean Theorem.
It is fascinating to look back and ponder the notion that mathematics not only has the power to

8
help us better understand reality, it has the transcending power to form bridges that span
millennia. It is even more fascinating to look ahead to the future for intellectual efforts that have
yet to be made, to think about the findings that await us, and to imagine the genesis of ideas that
may still grow out of what we already know.

Works Cited

(1) Begley, S., & Ramo, J.C. (1993, July 5). New answer for an old question. Newsweek,

p. 52-53.

(2) Bogolmony, A. (1996). Pythagorean theorem and its many proofs [On-line]. Retrieved
Jan. 17, 2003 from source: http://www.cut-the-knot.org/pythagoras/index.shtml.

(3) Encyclopædia of Mathematics, 3. (1989). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic

Publishers.

(4) Greenberg, M.J. (1974). Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries: development and
history. San Francisco, CA: W. H. Freeman.

(5) Putz, J.F., & Sipka, T.A. (2003, Sept). On generalizing the pythagorean theorem. The
College Mathematics Journal, 34, p. 291-295.

(6) Ryan, P.J. (1986). Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometry: an analytic approach. New
York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

(7) Usiskin, Z., Hirschhorn, D., et al. (2002). Geometry: second edition, p. 467-468. New
Jersey, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

(8) West, B.H., Griesbach, E.N., et al. (1982). The prentice hall encyclopedia of
mathematics, p. 461-465. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Publishing.