# Fit a equilateral triangle on three arbitrary parallel lines with an edge and compass

How can you fit a equilateral triangle on three arbitrary parallel lines with an edge and compass?

-

Well, I'm late to this, but I've been obsessing over this far too much to back out now. So: Label your parallel lines $a$, $b$, and $c$ from bottom to top. Construct a line $d$ with a "positive slope" that crosses $b$ such that the top right angle of their intersection is $60^\circ$. Extend the line so that is crosses $c$. Call the intersection of $d$ and $c$ point $A$. Construct another line $e$ such that it lies to the left of $d$, is parallel to $d$, and is the same distance from $d$ as $a$ is from $b$. Call the intersection of $e$ and $b$ point $B$. Draw an arc centered at $B$ and having radius $AB$, and crossing $a$. Call the intersection of the arc with $a$ point $C$. $\triangle ABC$ is your triangle.

Why does this work? Here's a hint: Start with an equilateral triangle $\triangle ABC$. Draw any line through $A$, and then draw a parallel line through $B$. Now identify the center $O$ of $\triangle ABC$. You have now have a triangle and two lines. Rotate the entire configuration $120^\circ$ around $O$. What do you get? Rotate another $120^\circ$. What do you get now?

-
Beautiful. Both answers are good, but yours is better explained (with scaffolding attached), so I have accepted this one. Thank you ! –  qed May 6 '13 at 14:46
Thanks! BTW, a variation would be to construct a third line $f$, parallel to $d$ and the same distance from $d$ that $b$ is from $c$. The intersection with $a$ would give point $C$. This might be conceptually simpler, but requires much more work than just drawing $\angle ABC$. –  bob.sacamento May 6 '13 at 15:26

For brevity, I will not go into details about how to construct perpendiculars and 30-degree angles using straightedge and compass. Same for doubling lengths. Translating those operations to compass-and-straightedge primitives is left to the reader. Given the three parallel lines and a vertex C arbitrarily fixed on one of those lines, I will find the two locations of another vertex, named E and E', that are suited for the fit, and I will not lose words about the rest because that should be obvious.

In C, construct a line perpendicular to the three parallel lines, and name the new intersection points A and B. Now have a look at the attached figure, which is symmetric with respect to the perpendicular line AC, and assume that all filled triangles are equilateral. In this demonstration, |AC| >= |AB| >= |BC| for tidyness, but it turns out that algebraically there is no such restriction for the scheme to work.

Rotate the kite CEFE' 60 degress around E to find that it is congruent to DEE'G. Therefore |DG|=|DE|=|DC|, so |CG|=2|CB|. Using this you can locate G and then branch off CG in G at angles of +/-30 degrees, intersecting with the parallel line through A to find E resp. E'.

-
Could you please explain a bit how you came up with the solution (i.e the scaffolding) ? Thanks! –  qed May 3 '13 at 18:15
@CravingSpirit: How I came up with the solution? Brace yourself. I actually calculated a suitable rotation angle (ECA in the attached figure) using trigonometry. Then I tried to interpret the result geometrically, which led me to define the point G by |CG| = 2|CB| and assert that the angle EGA is 30 degrees, in other words, that the triangle GEE' must be equilateral. This suggested that a simple geometric proof was within reach, and I found it via congruence resp. rotation by 60 degrees. You see, the first way found is rarely presentable. The figure has been made with Geogebra. –  ccorn May 3 '13 at 19:25
What do you mean a suitable rotation angle, and how did you calculate it? Thanks~ –  qed May 4 '13 at 14:05

I've found a different invariant that solves this problem: two circles bisecting a perpendicular between any two parallels cut each other at points that are exact middles of the side opposite to the vertex on the third parallel.

If you want more explanations and sketches please go to:

http://romanyandronov.elementfx.com/pse/ryapserac03.html

Sorry for providing the link - it's a small part of a bigger thing. In my articles I'm interested not in the answers themselves but rather in the ways one can find them. You may find other things of interest there.

This is an eleven-step construction, but I think that number can be reduced.

Outline: random point on any parallel, perpendicular through it, two circles bisecting any segment between any two lines, line through their intersection point and a point on the remaining parallel, perpendicular to that last line locates two remaining vertexes:

-
Your website is absolutely cool! –  qed Oct 20 '13 at 12:16

My previous construction took 11 steps to accomplish. Here's an 8-step one. My reasoning is here:

http://romanyandronov.elementfx.com/pse/ryapserac04.html

Invariant this time - an equilateral triangle built on the outer parallels locates two vertexes one of which is on the inner parallel:

In the sketch above triangle AGH locates A and C. That observation lead me to the following 8-step construction (the construction lines are numbered):

Algebraically (C() is circle, L() is line):

$$O_1, O_2 \in L_1$$ $$C(O_1, O_1O_2)$$ $$C(O_2, O_2O_1) \cap C(O_1, O_1O_2) = A, A_1$$ $$L(O_1, A) \cap L_2 = B, L_3 = C$$ $$C(O_1, O_1C) \cap L_1 = D$$ $$C(B, BD) \cap L_3 = E$$ $$L(B, D)$$ $$L(D, E)$$ $$L(E, B)$$

-