Morley's Theorem, a Proof

Brian Stonebridge (University of Bristol, UK)
January 30, 2009

In the diagram below, the near trisectors of the internal angles at the vertices A, B, and C of a triangle meet in X, Y, and Z. Morley's theorem states that the triangle XYZ is equilateral. We give here a direct Euclidean proof.

Morley's theorem

Using the notation in the diagram, since, in ΔABC, 3α + 3β + 3γ = π,

(1) α + β + γ = π/3.

From triangles BPC, CQA, ARB,

(2)
∠BPC= 2(α + π/6)
∠CQA= 2(β + π/6)
∠ARB= 2(γ + π/6)

Observe that, in ΔBPC, X is the intersection of the bisectors of angles at B and C. It follows that PX is the bisector of the angle at P. Thus,

(3)
∠ROX= ∠OPY + ∠ORY - ∠RYC
= (α + π/6) + (β + π/6) - (γ + π/6)
= π/3.

This result holds for any other pair of diagonals PX, QY, RZ.

Assume that the diagonals are not concurrent, and thus form a triangle.

Select a diagonal, RZ, say, and, through the opposite vertex v, draw rz, parallel to RZ, with z, r on QA, RB. Then, Δzvq, Δxvq are congruent (ASA). Choose y, p so that Δxvr, Δyvr are congruent (ASA) making

(4) vz = vx = vy,

and ∠vpy = ∠OPY so that Δvpy, Δvpz are congruent (SAA). Then the angles of pzqxry, PZQXRY are the same.

Joining opposite sides of pzqxry we obtain Δabc, with angles 3α, 3β, 3γ and its trisectors which generate Δxyz.** Triangles abc / ABC are similar, but, in Δabc, the diagonals are concurrent whilst in ΔABC they are not. This contradiction implies that our original assumption of non-concurrence of the diagonals of PZQXRY was false, and they must be concurrent. In pzqxry, we deduce from (3) and (4) that Δxyz is an equilateral triangle (equal radii, equal angles 2π/3).

** Informally," the mapping pzqxry ↔ abc is 1-1" suffices, but more formally the derivation of this result is as follows:

The intersections of opposite sides of pzqxry give Δabc. Since ∠zbx = β, if we draw a line at β to bz through b, bz is the bisector of the angle at b. But, rz (the bisector at r) meets bz at z, so z is the incenter of the triangle, T, say (with vertices b, r, and a third vertex at a, angle 2α with ry). Thus, its bisector az must make angle α with ry. But ra lies along ry and ∠zar = α, so the point, a, completes T. Repeating this argument, the angles of Δabc are seen to be trisected.

Morley's Miracle

  1. J.Conway's proof
  2. D. J. Newman's proof
  3. Bankoff's proof
  4. B. Bollobás' proof
  5. Another proof
  6. Nikos Dergiades' proof
  7. G. Zsolt Kiss' proof
  8. M. T. Naraniengar's proof
  9. Doodling and Miracles
  10. Morley's Pursuit of Incidence
  11. Lines, Circles and Beyond
  12. On Motivation and Understanding
  13. Bankoff's conundrum
  14. Of Looking and Seeing
  15. Morley's Redux and More, Alain Connes' proof
  16. An Unexpected Variant
  17. Proof by B. Stonebridge and B. Millar
  18. Proof by B. Stonebridge
  19. Proof by Nolan L Aljaddou
  20. Proof by Roger Smyth
  21. Proof by H. D. Grossman
  22. Proof by R. J. Webster
  23. Proof by H. Shutrick

|Contact| |Front page| |Contents| |Geometry| |Store|

Copyright © 1996-2012 Alexander Bogomolny

 40615554

A math books store at a unique math study site. Shopping at the store helps maintain the site. Thank you.
Sites for teachers
Sites for parents
Terms of use
Awards
Interactive Activities

CTK Exchange
CTK Wiki Math
CTK Insights - a blog
Math Help
Games & Puzzles
What Is What
Arithmetic
Algebra
Geometry
Probability
Outline Mathematics
Make an Identity
Book Reviews
Stories for Young
Eye Opener
Analog Gadgets
Inventor's Paradox
Did you know?...
Proofs
Math as Language
Things Impossible
Visual Illusions
My Logo
Math Poll
Cut The Knot!
MSET99 Talk
Old and nice bookstore
Other Math sites
Front Page
Movie shortcuts
Personal info
Privacy Policy

Guest book
News sites

Recommend this site

Sites for parents

Education & Parenting

Search:
Keywords:

Google
Web CTK
Supported by
3wVentures