Associated Topics || Dr. Math Home || Search Dr. Math

### Euclid's Parallel Postulate

```
Date: 14 Feb 1995 11:36:20 -0500
From: Cerreta, Pat
Subject: parallel postulate

I am studying Euclid's Parallel Postulate.  Why did mathematicians
disagree with him?  What other geometries resulted from this
disagreement?  What postulate replaced the Parallel Postulate?

Thank You,
Byram Hills Freshman Geometry Class
Armonk,New York
```

```
Date: 14 Feb 1995 14:59:02 -0500
From: Dr. Ethan
Subject: Re: parallel postulate

Howdy folks,

Well, to fully explain you need to make sure you know the difference
between a theorem and a postulate.  A postulate is a statement about a
geometrical world that is accepted without justification and makes the
frame work for the geometrical world.  A theorem is a conclusion that
follows logically from the postulates using rational argument and does
require justification.  It is a result of the framework of the
geometrical world.

So now to Euclid's fourth and most troublesome postulate:

For every line, l, and point, P, which is not on that line, there exists a
unique line, m, through P that is parallel to l.  (Remember parallel means
that they do not intersect.  It does not necessarily mean that they are
always the same distance apart.)

This is a postulate, so when you say that you disagree with it, that
doesn't mean it is wrong it just means that you don't want to assume that
it is true in your geometrical world.

The disagreement came when mathematicians tried to figure out whether
or not the parallel postulate had to be taken as a postulate, or whether it
followed from the other four.  This was hotly debated but eventually it was
determined that no, it did not follow from the other three.  It had to be
assumed in order to get Euclidean geometry (Which for a long time was
the only geometry that anybody thought mattered).

From our perspective, the most important of these attempts was that
made by Girolamo Saccheri.  He hoped to assume that the postulate
wasn't true, and show that that led to something that made no sense;
thereby proving the postulate true.  He was unable to find a contradiction
but did unknowingly discover the first non-Euclidean geometry (i.e. one in
which the fifth postulate doesn't hold)

Well I guess I'm going to skip a lot of history here and skip to the results.
It was eventually decided that the fifth postulate was indeed a postulate
so we didn't have to assume it.  The two assumptions that have been used

1. Given a line, l, and a point, P, not on that line there are infinitely
many lines passing through P that are parallel to l.
(This produces hyperbolic geometry)

2. Given a line, l, and a point not on that line, P, there are no lines
passing through P parallel to l.
(This produces projective geometry)

and I will tell you more.

Ethan Doctor On Call
```

```
Date: 14 Feb 1995 21:53:39 -0500
From: Dr. Ken
Subject: Re: parallel postulate

Hello there!

I just thought I'd add to the wonderful answer of my colleague and buddy
Ethan.  The two kinds of Non-Euclidean geometry are what we get by
assuming the _negation_ of the parallel postulate.  Since the parallel
postulate says, "for any line, l, and any point, p, not on that line, there
is exactly one line through p which is parallel to l," the negation of it is,
"there exists a line, l, and a point, p, not on that line such that there is
either (a) no line through p which is parallel to l, or (b) more than one
line through p which is parallel to l."

It turns out that if there is one place in our geometry where we're in case
(a), we can prove that we're in case (a) _everywhere_, i.e. that there are
no parallel lines whatsoever in our whole system of geometry.  We call this
geometry (as Ethan said) projective geometry or spherical geometry.  The
definition is that "there exists a line, l, and a point, p, not on that line
such that there is no line through p which is parallel to l," but we can
prove that "given any line, l, and any point, p, there is no line through p
which is parallel to l."

Also, if there's any place where we're in case (b), then we're in case (b)
everywhere.  This is known as Hyperbolic geometry.  The definition is
"there exists a line, l, and a point, p, not on that line such that there is
more than one line through p parallel to l," but we can actually prove that
the following holds: "given any line, l, and any point, p, not on that line,
there are infinitely many lines through p which are parallel to l."

For what that's worth.

-Ken "Dr." Math
```
Associated Topics:
High School Euclidean/Plane Geometry
High School Geometry
High School Higher-Dimensional Geometry
Middle School Geometry
Middle School Higher-Dimensional Geometry
Middle School Two-Dimensional Geometry

Search the Dr. Math Library:

 Find items containing (put spaces between keywords):   Click only once for faster results: [ Choose "whole words" when searching for a word like age.] all keywords, in any order at least one, that exact phrase parts of words whole words

Submit your own question to Dr. Math
Math Forum Home || Math Library || Quick Reference || Math Forum Search