Deriving the Metric of Euclidean Space without Recourse to Angular

Measure
Preface
Most presentations of Euclidean geometry introduce angles, in addition to points, lines, planes, etc, as
primitive notions. The property of angle-measure is assumed in canonical proofs of the Pythagorean
theorem, but the term angle is not carefully defned. f !e adopt the defnition of an angle measure as
the ratio of an arc length to the circumference of the circle to !hich it belongs, then !e can conclude that
angle measure is not primitive, but actually derived from the concept of length !hen applied to arcs.
Therefore, !e cannot use angles as a primitive notion to defne the metric of Euclidean space, because the
defnition of angle presupposes a prior metric in Euclidean space. This paper attempts to derive a metric in
Euclidean space !ithout recourse to "ngular Measure.
Part #$ %efnitions
&eometry, li'e all other felds of mathematics, can be built on the concept of a set. " set is simply a
collection of ob(ects. Mathematics is the study of sets of numbers, !ith the idea of number ta'en as
fundamental and universally understood. &eometry is the study of certain relationships bet!een these
sets. &eometers see' to establish congruency and equivalence bet!een di)erent sets. They introduce the
concept of measure in order to compare such sets to each other.
" point in geometry can be represented !ith a number. *or instance, the number +,- represents a point
that is , arbitrary units to the right of the origin. f our number !as -,, our point !ould then be , units to
the left of the origin. The origin is our reference point, and defnes the position of every other point. .e can
also imagine a point that re/uires t!o numbers to specify its location, such as +,,0-. .e interpret this as a
point on a plane. Moving , units to the right, and 0 units up !ould give us the position of our point.
Therefore, the point +,- is e/uivalent to the point +,,1-. %irections such as left, right, up, and do!n
refer to movements parallel to the axes. The a2es tell !hat our degrees of freedom are, and the number of
parameters necessary to tell us the location of our point is the dimensionality, or the number of degrees of
freedom, that !e have. These a2es !ill herein be referred to as 2 and y.
.e can also imagine composite ob(ects, formed out of a collection of points. The set 3+,,1-, +,,0-4 refers to
t!o dis(oint points located on a plane. This is fairly straightfor!ard, if some!hat uninteresting. " more
interesting ob(ect could be formed if !e had an algorithm that could output a y for every input of 2.
5uch an algorithm is 'no!n as a function. The simplest e2ample of a function is the line, !hich ta'es the
form$ f+2-6 m2 7 yi , !ith m and b being constants. m represents the slope +defned as f+'--f+(-8'-(- and
yi represents the y-intercept. This function !ill give us an infnite number of points stretching across out
plane. f !e introduce restrictions on our 2 values, such that (929', !ith ( and ' being t!o arbitrary 2
values, !e can create an open-interval. f !e defne f+2- such that ( 2 ', !e have a closed-interval,
other!ise 'no!n as a line segment. f our only condition is ( 2 then !e have created a ray. The point +(,
f+(-- on the ray is 'no!n as the endpoint. These terms !ill be useful later on.
f !e e2amine closed intervals that have a slope of 1 or an undefned +infnite- slope, then !e can defne a
ne! property 'no!n as the measure. The measure of the set of all points, ( 2 ' for the function y6 yi is
simply ' : (. 5imilarly, if !e ta'e the function 262i +2i being the 2-intercept- is also '-(. Thus, it is trivial to
determine the measure for lines that are parallel to one of the a2es. ;pen intervals are defned to have the
same measure as closed intervals, and rays are said to have infnite measure.
.e can perform several operations !ith these sets of points. The frst is a union. " union is a (oining of
points from one set and another to form a bigger set that contains all the points of the previous t!o sets. f
set " !as 3+,,1-, +,,0-4 and set < !as 3+=,>-, +0,=-4 then the union bet!een " and < is 3+,,1-, +,,0-, +=,>-,
+0,=-4. The opposite of a union is an intersection. "n intersection ta'es only the elements that are held in
common. *or sets " and <, the intersection is the empty set, 34. This is a set !ith no elements.
.e can no! defne various transformations that can be applied on our sets. The frst 'ind of transformation
is a translation. " translation is the adding or subtracting of a particular number to one or more of our
parameters. *or instance, adding +,- to set " !ould transform 3+,,1-, +,,0-4 into 3+#1,1-, +#1,0-4. "dding
+,,=- to set " !ould transform 3+,,1-, +,,0-4 into 3+#1,=-, +#1,?-4. " translation can be thought of as a
sliding motion, uniformly translating our fgure from one position to another.
"nother transformation is an inversion. Multiplying one or more of the parameters by +-#- is an inversion
along that parameter@s a2is. *or e2ample, multiplying all the 2-values of a set of points by negative one
!ould be an inversion across the 2-a2is.
" third transformation is a reAection. This involves transposing the numerical values of the parameters of a
given set of points. The
"t this point, !e have the mathematical tools to defne an angle. "n angle is a geometrical fgure that
represents the union of t!o lines. The lines can either be line segments or rays. f !e start out !ith t!o
dis(oint lines in a plane +or higher dimensional space-, than !e must translate one or both of the lines so
that they have e2actly one common endpoint. "n angle is the intersection of t!o lines !ith e2actly one
common endpoint.
.e must be cautious in ho! !e approach the idea of an angle. .e have not yet defned an e2pression for
the measure of an angle. Thus, !e cannot say that angles !ith di)erent side lengths are congruent, even if
!e can intuitively say that they are.
.e might imagine operations such as angle addition, in !hich, if possible, !e apply a number of
transformations to t!o angles such that they share not only one common endpoint, but also a common
line. t is important that the common line be the same line, because !e have not yet proven that angles
!ith di)erent side lengths are congruent. The common line must have a value for the slope that is
bet!een the slopes of the outer lines. .e then discard the common line, and end up !ith the sum of the
t!o angles. f !e !ish to fnd the di)erence, !e must again translate and reAect the t!o angles until they
share a common line, and then discard that common line to fnd the angle di)erence.
Part >$ Proofs
T!o ob(ects !ill be defned as congruent if$
#. The set of points can be mapped onto another set of point using vertical or horiBontal shifting of
the points so that the sets are e/uivalent +i.e one ob(ect can be translated to cover the other
ob(ect.-
or
>. f the set of points in the frst ob(ect can, by s!itching all the 2 and y coordinates be made
congruent to the set of points in the second ob(ect.
or
=. The t!o sets can be made congruent by some combination of the above methods
These are referred to as the translational isometry and the inversion isometry of Euclidean space.
Cater on, !e !ill !or' !ith the concept of angle measure, !hich !ill be defned as the ratio of an arc
length to the circumference of a circle. .e !ill sho! that congruent angles have e/ual angle measure.
Part T!o$ Proofs