Here is a proposition that I saw presented in a plane geometry textbook. The argument in the textbook was unusually awkward. I think that there is a simple argument for it. I would appreciate comments to the demonstration that I am providing.

$\overline{AB}$ is a chord in a circle, and $\ell$ is a line that is tangent to the circle at $P$. $\ell$ is parallel to $\overline{AB}$ if, and only if, $\arc{AP} = \arc{BP}$.

Demonstration of "Only If"

$\overline{AB}$ and $\ell$ are parallel, and $k$ is the line through $P$ that is perpendicular to $\ell$. $k$ contains the center $O$ of the circle, and so, $k = \dvec{OP}$. $k$ is perpendicular to $\dvec{AB}$, too. If $M$ is the midpoint of $\overline{AB}$, $\dvec{OM}$ is perpendicular to $\overline{AB}$. There is only one line through $O$ that is perpendicular to $\overline{AB}$. So, $k = \dvec{OM} = \dvec{OP}$.

$\triangle{AOM} \cong \triangle{BOM}$. If $\overline{PQ}$ is a diameter of the circle, \begin{equation*} {\mathrm{m}}\angle{AOQ} = {\mathrm{m}}\angle{AOM} = {\mathrm{m}}\angle{BOM} = {\mathrm{m}}\angle{BOQ} . \end{equation*} By the definition of angular measure, ${\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{AQ}\bigr) = {\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{BQ}\bigr)$. So, \begin{equation*} {\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{AP}\bigr) = 180 - {\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{AQ}\bigr) = 180 - {\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{BQ}\bigr) = {\mathrm{m}}\bigl(\arc{BP}\bigr) . \ \rule{1.5ex}{1.5ex} \end{equation*}

The following code can be compiled by TikZ to render a diagram associated with this argument.

\noindent \hspace*{\fill} \begin{tikzpicture}

\coordinate (O) at (0,0); \draw[fill] (O) circle (1.5pt); \draw[name path=circle] (O) circle (2);

%Points A and B are drawn on the circle. Radii $\overline{OA}$ and $\overline{OB}$ are drawn. \coordinate (A) at (180:2); \node at ($(A)!-3mm!(O)$){$A$}; \coordinate (B) at (70:2); \node at ($(B)!-3mm!(O)$){$B$}; \draw (A) -- (B); \draw (O) -- (A); \draw (O) -- (B);

%The diameter of the circle is drawn through the midpoint M of $\overline{AB}$. %The endpoints are labeled P and Q. \coordinate (M) at ($(A)!0.5!(B)$);

%The label for M is typeset. \coordinate (label_for_M_above) at ($(M)!1cm!(A)$); \coordinate (label_for_M_right) at ($(M)!1cm!(B)$); \path (label_for_M_above) -- (label_for_M_right); \coordinate (midpoint_on_line_segment_to_position_M) at ($(label_for_M_above)!0.5!(label_for_M_right)$); \node at ($(M)!4mm!(midpoint_on_line_segment_to_position_M)$){$M$};

%The diameter $\overline{PQ}$ is drawn. \path[name path=path_to_locate_P] (M) -- ($(M)!3.5cm!(O)$); \coordinate[name intersections={of=path_to_locate_P and circle, by=P}]; \node at ($(P)!-3mm!(M)$){$P$}; \draw[fill] (P) circle (1.5pt);

\path[name path=path_to_locate_Q] (M) -- ($(M)!-1cm!(O)$); \coordinate[name intersections={of=path_to_locate_Q and circle, by=Q}]; \node at ($(Q)!-3mm!(M)$){$Q$};

\draw (P) -- (Q);

%A right-angle mark is drawn at M. \coordinate (U) at ($(M)!4mm!-45:(O)$); \draw[dashed] (U) -- ($(M)!(U)!(O)$); \draw[dashed] (U) -- ($(M)!(U)!(A)$);

%The label for O is typeset. \coordinate (label_for_O_above) at ($(O)!1cm!(B)$); \coordinate (label_for_O_right) at ($(O)!1cm!(P)$); \path (label_for_O_above) -- (label_for_O_right); \coordinate (midpoint_on_line_segment_to_position_O) at ($(label_for_O_above)!0.5!(label_for_O_right)$); \node at ($(O)!3mm!(midpoint_on_line_segment_to_position_O)$){$O$};

%Line segments $\overline{OA}$ and $\overline{OB}$ are marked with "|". \draw ($($(O)!0.5!(A)$)!3pt!90:(O)$) -- ($($(O)!0.5!(A)$)!3pt!-90:(O)$); \draw ($($(O)!0.5!(B)$)!3pt!90:(O)$) -- ($($(O)!0.5!(B)$)!3pt!-90:(O)$);

%Line segments $\overline{AM}$ and $\overline{BM}$ are marked with "||". \draw ($($($(A)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(A)$)!3pt!90:(A)$) -- ($($($(A)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(A)$)!3pt!-90:(A)$); \draw ($($($(A)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(M)$)!3pt!90:(A)$) -- ($($($(A)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(M)$)!3pt!-90:(A)$); \draw ($($($(B)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(B)$)!3pt!90:(B)$) -- ($($($(B)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(B)$)!3pt!-90:(B)$); \draw ($($($(B)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(M)$)!3pt!90:(B)$) -- ($($($(B)!0.5!(M)$)!1pt!(M)$)!3pt!-90:(B)$);

%The tangent line $\ell$ to the circle at P is drawn. \draw[-latex] (P) -- ($(P)!3.5cm!90:(O)$); \draw[-latex] (P) -- ($(P)!3.5cm!-90:(O)$); \node at ($(P)!{3.5cm+0.3cm}!-90:(O)$){$\ell$};

%The angle mark for $\angles{AOQ}$ is drawn. It is marked with "|". \draw[draw=blue] let \p1=($(O)-(Q)$), \n1={atan(\y1/\x1)} in ($(O)!0.4cm!(A)$) arc (180:{\n1+180}:0.4); \draw[blue] let \p1=($(O)-(Q)$), \n1={atan(\y1/\x1)} in ($(O) +({0.5*(180+(\n1+180))}:{0.4cm-3pt})$) -- ($(O) +({0.5*(180+(\n1+180))}:{0.4cm+3pt})$);

%The angle mark for $\angles{BOQ}$ is drawn. It is marked with "|". \draw[draw=blue] let \p1=($(O)-(Q)$), \n1={atan(\y1/\x1)} in ($(O)!0.4cm!(Q)$) arc ({\n1+180}:70:0.4); \draw[blue] let \p1=($(O)-(Q)$), \n1={atan(\y1/\x1)} in ($(O) +({0.5*((\n1+180)+70)}:{0.4cm-3pt})$) -- ($(O) +({0.5*((\n1+180)+70)}:{0.4cm+3pt})$);

\end{tikzpicture} \hspace{\fill}

  • $\begingroup$ I suggest you insert a real picture instead of the code for a reader to do. Very few will actually compile it. $\endgroup$ – A.Γ. Oct 10 '15 at 18:58
  • $\begingroup$ Why is that unusually awkward? It seems like that would be the straightforward approach... $\endgroup$ – Michael Biro Oct 10 '15 at 19:07
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael Biro I presented my own argument for the proposition. The argument from the textbook was awkward. $\endgroup$ – user74973 Oct 10 '15 at 21:21
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael Biro Apparently you read my argument and understood it. Any suggestions? Did you compile the code with TikZ? $\endgroup$ – user74973 Oct 10 '15 at 21:22
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, I see. I will post the version of this argument I was considering. I didn't compile the code, but the description was clear enough. $\endgroup$ – Michael Biro Oct 10 '15 at 21:26

I think this version of the approach might be a little bit simpler, although it is essentially the same idea.

By the inscribed angle theorem, the claim is equivalent to showing that $\angle ABP = \angle BAP$. This is in turn equivalent to showing that the perpendicular to $\mathit{l}$ through $P$ bisects $AB$.

So, take your line $k$ perpendicular to $\mathit{l}$ at $P$, and note (like you did) that $k$ goes through the center of the circle $O$ and is also perpendicular to $AB$. Now look at the triangle $OAB$. Since it is isosceles with base $AB$ that means that $k$ must bisect $AB$.

  • $\begingroup$ As I am teaching this course, I wanted to emphasize the definitions of angular measure. I also wanted to remind students that the line perpendicular to a tangent to a circle and through the point of tangency contains the center of the circle. (You did reference this in your argument.) Thanks. $\endgroup$ – user74973 Oct 15 '15 at 19:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.