Roy Choi

04/26/2010
MM1R
Geometer Sketchpad Paper
To sum it up, Geometer Sketchpad was an absolute pleasure to
use. It mae e!ery tas" with #onstru#tions so mu#h easier, $aster an
all the more a##urate. I thorou%hly en&oye the inter$a#e an the many
$eatures that this well thou%ht'out pro%ram ha to o(er. )in#e I i well
below o$ my iea o$ a!era%e on my *ui+ on #onstru#tions an was
rather #on$use on what #onstru#tions were suppose to a#tually en
up pro!in%, Geometer Sketchpad tau%ht me applau the #onstru#tions
by showin% some #ool animations an the limitless number thin%s you
#oul possibly pro!e with it. Geometer Sketchpad shoul be use in
,eometry #lassrooms to en$or#e an bolster the reasons to why
theorems wor" an pro!ie a hans'on atta#" at proo$s. -!en thou%h
we only %ot to play aroun with Sketchpad $or a little while, most o$ us
i$ not all were able to .nish all the labs, whi#h really shows how
e(e#ti!e an easy to use this pro%ram is. /s we .nishe ea#h lab, we
ene up with a !ery #ool plane or it #oul e!en be a sin%le line set to
the per$e#t ,olen Ratio. 0hen I .rst saw the pa#"et, I thou%ht o$ how
mu#h ener%y went into ma"in% it. It pro!ie step by step instru#tions
an in#lue ia%rams on how ea#h step shoul loo" li"e. 0hat I li"e
most about the pa#"et was that it was or%ani+e su#h that labs that
ha some "in o$ #orrelation were either on the same pa%e or the ne1t.
)o, with a heart $ull o$ %ratitue an a brain .lle with shapes, I be%in
my wal"throu%h o$ our many labs.
2ur .rst #onstru#tion in!ol!e how to show where the
ortho#enter, #entroi, an #ir#um#enter in a trian%le were. This was
the simplest lab $or me, i$ not the entire #lass. . I #reate a $ew
perpeni#ular lines. 3or the most part, all you ha to o was $ollow the
instru#tions an the #onstru#tion #ame to li$e. My only mista"es #ame
with labelin% the point wron%, I a##iently labele the line instea an
#reatin% parallel lines instea o$ perpeni#ular lines. 4ut, this was
easily remeie by the ni$ty 5CTR6'78 #omman an reoin% the
mista"e.
3or the se#on part, we were instru#te to #onstru#t a !ery
$amous .%ure in the history o$ mathemati#s9 the )ierpins"i:s Trian%le.
This was &ust a ta bit more #on$usin% as it relie on the $un#tion o$
iteration. I ha hear o$ ilation, rotation, translation, but ne!er
iteration. ;ason, /nrew an I all sat there *uestionin% what e1a#tly
iteration was. 0ith the ha+iest iea o$ what to o, we bar%e on.
3ollowin% step by step the instru#tions, my %roup was able to $ully
#omplete the )ierins"i:s trian%le. -!en thou%h we ha absolutely no
iea what iteration was, we mana%e the lab without e!er "nowin%
what it was. I $elt rather a##omplishe a$ter this lab. Then, we #reate
the <o#h #ur!e !ia iterations an learnin% how to trise#t. This lab ha
the ner!e to point out one o$ the $ew short#omin%s o$ Geometer
Sketchpad9 It la#"e an a#tual trise#t $un#tion. It too" some time to %et
the ilation trans$ormations ri%ht in orer to #reate trise#tion points.
/$ter .nally #reatin% the <o#h #ur!e, we were instru#te to see i$ we
#oul #reate the )ierpins"i Carpet. This was a ta bit i=#ult to #reate
the points #orre#tly. Ta"in% a loo" at the .nal prou#t howe!er was
worth all the har wor" an e(ort.
In the se#on lab, we were suppose to #reate what is #alle a
5base'moti$8 $ra#tal. 0hen #reatin% the 6e!y Cur!e we use the
rotation trans$ormation an then iterations. It seems li"e e!erythin%
uses iterations. I lo!e the way the en result turne out thou%h. It was
intri#ate an well etaile. The se#on part o$ the lab was to #reate the
>ra%on Cur!e ?;urassi# Par" 3ra#tal@, whi#h re*uire repetiti!e
iterations. /t .rst I #reate another 6e!y Cur!e. I ponere it $or a
while on why his woul happen. I playe with Sketchpad an the
mappin%s an e!entually .%ure it out.
6ab AB tau%ht me how to ma"e a tool. /t .rst, I was pu++le
about how 'C0 e%rees #oul be a $un#tion. 0hy wouln:t you &ust say
2D0 e%rees insteaE Creatin% the tool was easy. )omethin% a little
#hil woul be #apable o$ oin%. Ma"in% the Pytha%orean 3ra#tal Tree
an re*uire a bit o$ playin% aroun with the !arious points on the
maps. I ha to .%ure out aroun what point I woul iterate on an the
pre!iew helpe but it "ept on not showin% what I wante until I .nally
ha the #orre#t points. 0at#hin% the animation o$ the $ra#tal tree was
astounin%F Pro!in% the Pytha%orean Theorem with isse#tions was
easy to !isuali+e but har to pro!e. I *uestione this proo$ $or *uite
some time. -!entually Mr. Rubinstein showe me how to #reate an
animation o$ the bo1 an I .nally unerstoo the #orrelation between
the sies. Proo$ A2 o$ the Pytha%orean Theorem was really #ompli#ate
by the .$th step. / lar%e number o$ ar#s, raii, an #hors mae li$e
i=#ult. 0hen I e!entually .nishe the #onstru#tion, I ha no #lue
about how this woul pro!e the Pytha%orean Theorem. My $rien
e!entually tol me his reasonin% an I somewhat a%ree with it.
The G-1plorin% -u#li:s Proo$ o$ the Pytha%orean Theorem: was a
lon% an re*uire many steps to #omplete. It was a isappointment
be#ause it loo"e li"e su#h a basi# .%ure when #omplete. -u#li:s
proo$ o$ the Pytha%orean Theorem ma"es minimal sense as its .lle
with #omple1 steps an ia%rams between our !ersion an his !ersion
o not #orrelate. Howe!er, upon $urther sel$'*uestionin% I .%ure the
steps were similar i$ not same. Howe!er, he ha to ta"e a $ew e1tra
steps be#ause he wasn:t usin% Geometer Sketchpad.
/nn Conit:s proo$ pro!es the relationship between the areas o$
two trian%les. The proo$ was i=#ult be#ause I attempte to rush
throu%h it without analy+in% the area o$ the trian%les. The ia%ram
helpe a lot $or a##ura#y. 3or e1ample it says to put C as a point on the
#ir#le an that:s a pretty wie ran%e. The ia%ram helpe by #lari$yin%
some o$ these misunerstanin%s.
To me, the ,olen Ratio 6ab was one o$ the most isappointin% o$
all the labs. The other labs weren:t borin%, but rather i=#ult an
re*uirin% a lot o$ brain power. This one &ust outri%ht isappointe me.
0hen I .rst measure se%ment /H4 an #al#ulate the proportions,
they weren:t in the 5,olen Ratio.8 Thin"in% I ha one somethin%
wron%, I loo"e on an saw that there was the more a##urate way o$
oin% it. The way I ha one now was &ust $or #omparison purposes.
The ne1t way was simple an *uite e1planatory. Ipon #al#ulatin% the
proportion, I saw that they were !ery #lose ?only o( by li"e
0.000004D6@. I was upset that it still wasn:t e1a#tE Jothin%:s per$e#t, I
%uess.
Constru#tin% ins#ribe poly%ons was !ery easy. They basi#ally
$ollowe the same steps, but too" a i(erent twist somewhere alon%
the path. I $oun it *uite #ool to be able to #opy an an%le into a ray.
This is #onsierably a #ool $eature that Sketchpad permits. This was
the se#on easiest se#tion as most #onstru#tions on this pa%e was
three steps or less. These #onstru#tions re*uire little to no thin"in%
an there$ore not !ery #hallen%in%.
Ipon loo"in% throu%h the pa#"et, the se#on part o$ the
Constru#tin% an Ins#ribe Poly%ons loo"e li"e one o$ the more
#hallen%in% #ompli#ate labs. 0e were now wor"in% with #omple1
multistep #onstru#tions that re*uire el!in% into the eeper meanin%
as to why it #oul wor". 3or the .rst #onstru#tion in this part o$ the
lab, I learne how to ins#ribe a trian%le similar to a %i!en trian%le into a
%i!en #ir#le. 0hile #ompletin% this #onstru#tion, I use a lot o$
te#hni*ues I learne $rom other labs an Part I o$ this lab, ma"in% a
tan%ent on a #ir#le an #opyin% an an%le onto a ray. I mae a tan%ent
to the #ir#le be#ause the tan%ent ser!e as the ray where I ultimately
#opie the an%le $rom the trian%le. This was a #ulmination o$ two
thin%s I learne in the .rst part. I repeate the pro#ess an went
throu%h the steps until I #opie two an%les $rom the %i!en trian%le an
ins#ribe them in the #ir#le, #reatin% similar trian%les !ia the /n%le'
/n%le similarity theorem. In the ne1t #onstru#tion, I learne how to
#reate a trian%le with an%le measures o$ B6, D2, an D2 e%rees usin%
the %olen ratio. 4y #reatin% two #ir#les with raii o$ len%ths in the
%olen ratio, you #an easily #onne#t their interse#tion points to the
enpoints o$ a line se%ment in the %olen ratio an %et a B6,D2,D2
trian%le. This #onstru#tion was a lot easier than the pre!ious one in this
part o$ the lab. This #onstru#tion in!ol!e ins#ribin% a B6, D2, D2
trian%le in a #ir#le. /$ter that step, the an%le bise#tors o$ the two
#on%ruent an%les in the trian%le will interse#t the #ir#le at the points
whi#h will then $orm a re%ular penta%on when &oine with the points o$
the trian%le.
In the ne1t lab, I learne how to trise#t an an%le. I remember
learnin% how to trise#t a se%ment by han when we were learnin%
#onstru#tions prior to startin% )"et#hpa pro&e#t. I in:t really
unerstan the #onstru#tion mu#h e!en thou%h it loo"e $airly simple. I
was hopin% that trise#tin% an an%le woul be mae mu#h easier in
Geometer Sketchpad. ,rate$ully, it was $airly easy to #reate the
trise#tion an unerstan why it wor"e. /$ter #reatin% the
#onstru#tion, I unerstoo that sin#e >- was #on%ruent to 4/, an that
/- an 4/ were both raii o$ the #ir#le I #onstru#te, >- was also
#on%ruent to /-, ma"in% trian%le >/- an isos#eles trian%le with an%les
->/ an -/> #on%ruent to ea#h other. Isin% the theorem that the
e1terior an%le o$ a trian%le is e*ual to the sum o$ the two remote
interior an%les, I noti#e that an%le /-4 whi#h is the e1terior an%le to
an%le /-> was e*ual to twi#e the measure o$ an%le ->/. /pplyin% this
pro#eure a%ain on trian%le /-4, I $oun that trian%le /-4 was
isos#eles an that an%le /4- was e*ual to twi#e the measure o$ an%le
->/. /pplyin% this pro#eure one .nal time, I rea#he the #on#lusion
that an%le 4/C e*uale the measures o$ an%le /4- ?2 1 ->/@ ae to
an%le ->/, #on.rmin% that an%le 4/C was three times the measure o$
an%le ->/. Trise#tin% an an%le was $airly simple on Sketchpad when
#ompare to rawin% it by han.
Constru#tin% the *uaratri1 itsel$ wasn:t too i=#ult o$ a tas",
althou%h I i %et #on$use when #al#ulatin% an%les usin% the ratio I
#reate. /$ter #onstru#tin% a se%ment on the lo#us o$ the *uaratri1, I
simply ha to trise#t that se%ment an #onne#t it to the point on the
s*uare, whi#h the .rst se%ment was rawn to. /$ter oin% so, the
measure an%le was nearly trise#te ?It was not e1a#t be#ause a
se%ment rawn #an not a#tually interse#t the lo#usK it #an only be
rawn near it.
The ne1t lab was one o$ the more i=#ult labs $or me. Throu%h
i(erent methos, this lab tau%ht me how to 5s*uare8 a #ir#le. The .rst
metho by oin% this was s*uarin% a re#tan%le by $ormin% an a&a#ent
s*uare. The sie o$ the s*uare an one sie o$ the re#tan%le woul
$orm the iameter o$ a #ir#le, an the s*uare an re#tan%le woul
always ha!e the same area, e!en i$ the len%ths o$ the re#tan%le were
#han%e. The reason both areas stay the same is be#ause when you
loo" at the two *uarilaterals as ins#ribe in a #ir#le, trian%le >,-
woul be a ri%ht trian%le be#ause any trian%le ins#ribe in a semi#ir#le
is a ri%ht trian%le. I then applie a theorem I learne in %eometry last
term9 The altitue o$ a ri%ht trian%le is the mean proportion between
the se%ments o$ the hypotenuse. 0ith ,C bein% the altitue o$ the
ri%ht trian%le, an C- ?a sie o$ the s*uare@ an C> ?a sie o$ the
re#tan%le@ bein% se%ments o$ the hypotenuse, the theorem &usti.es
why the areas o$ the re#tan%le an the s*uare stay the same.
In the ne1t part o$ the lab, I ha to s*uare a trian%le usin% a
similar pro#ess to the one use in the pre!ious #onstru#tion. I was able
to #onstru#t the trian%le an the re#tan%le properly. Howe!er, I #oul
not #onstru#t the s*uare properly so that its area staye the same as
the area o$ the re#tan%le. I trie to $ollow the e1a#t same pro#eure as
the pre!ious #onstru#tion when #reatin% the s*uare, but when I trie
#reatin% the s*uare $rom where the altitue woul interse#t the
hypotenuse, my s*uare was not #orre#tly #onstru#te. The areas o$ the
s*uare an re#tan%le were somewhat #lose, but their i(eren#e in area
%rew as I #han%e the len%ths o$ the re#tan%le:s sies. The .nal part o$
this lab was #reatin% Ramanu&an:s appro1imate s*uarin% o$ the #ir#le.
The pro#eure $or #reatin% the #onstru#tion was $airly simple an sel$'
e1planatory.
2!erall, Geometer Sketchpad has been a woner$ul e1perien#e.
It:s power$ul, simple an easy'to'use me#hani#s &ust #li#"e with my
inner mathemati#ian an ea%er te#hnolo%i#al &un"ie insie. It mae
#onstru#tions mu#h easier an mu#h more a##urate than I possibly
#oul ha!e one. It utili+es te#hnolo%i#al inno!ations an boils own
problems to the simplest $orms $or any aspirin% stuents. The pro%ram
was e!en use to pro!e some "ey areas in math, primarilyK the s*uare,
the %olen ratio an the $amous Pytha%orean Theorem.
CONSTRUCTIONS
Centroid
CIrcumcenter
Sierpinski Triangle
B'
A
B
Sierpinski Carpet
D C
A B
Koch Curve
E
D C A B

Levy Curve
C
A B
Pythagorean Fractal Tree
D'
E'
E'
C'
B
C
D
A
E
Pythagorean Theorem Proof
J2 L B.14#m
H
I
M
G
N L
O
J
F
E
A
B
D
C
K
Pythagorean Theorem Proof #2
Square DEHZ has side lengh C!he lengh "# BC$% &he area "# his square is
C'(% &he lenghs "# )O and MN are B!he lengh "# CA$% &he lenghs "# I) and ON
are A!he lengh "# AB$% S" KL and KJ are equal " B*A% &his resuls in he
equai"n (a+,!+*a$!+*a$ as he area "# sha-e IJKLMNO)% &his si.-li#ies in" a'(
, +'(/ and sin0e square DEHZ and sha-e IJKLMNO) are equal in area/ C'(1
A'(,B'(%
K
J
Z
M L
N
I
)
H
F
E
A B
D
C
O
uclid Proof! Part "
Con#ecture! The area
o$ the trian%le is one
hal$ the area o$ the
re#tan%le.
Area DEJH 1 22%3( 0.
(
Area IHJ 1 (4%56 0.
(
E D
H J
I
The $olden Fractal Spiral
K J I
B A H
AH
HB
1 6%7(
AB
AH
1 6%7(
AB 1 3%42 0.
HB 1 8%89 0.
AH 1 2%96 0.
EB 1 5%43 0.
EF 1 5%43 0.
H
A
B
$olden %ectangle
J I
B A H
Copying an &ngle onto a ray
.ABC 1 84%76M
E'
B A
C
D
.DFE 1 (:%:(M
.LKC 1 43%(:M
.KCL 1 (:%:(M
.KLC 1 36%43M
*.DEF 1 *43%(:M
.DEF 1 43%(:M
.FDE 1 36%43M
K
L
G'
A
B
D F
E
C
H
.FDE 1 27%98M
A
B
D F
E
C
Inscri'ing an (uilateral Triangle
. FG 1 4%52 0.
. FE 1 4%52 0.
. DE 1 4%52 0.
. CD 1 4%52 0.
. HC 1 4%52 0.
. HG 1 4%52 0.
H
G
F
E
D
A
B
C
Inscri'ing a )e*agon
. FG 1 4%52 0.
. FE 1 4%52 0.
. DE 1 4%52 0.
. CD 1 4%52 0.
. HC 1 4%52 0.
. HG 1 4%52 0.
H
G
F
E
D
A
B
C
Inscri'ing a S(uare
F
E
D
A
B
C
+aking a Tangent to & Circle
A
B
C
Creating a ,uadrati*
.BAM 1 ((%25M
.BAI 1 74%48M
DE
DA
*5:M1 *28%84M
DE
DA
1 :%25
L
K
J
H
G
F
A
B
D C
E
I
M
Trisecting an &ngle
.BAC 1 (5%33M
.EDA 1 5%56M .EDA 1 5%56M
.EBA 1 65%54M
.AEB 1 65%54M .EDA 1 5%56M
.AEB 1 65%54M .EBA 1 65%54M
EA 1 5%49 0.
AB 1 5%49 0.
ED 1 5%35 0.
EA 1 5%49 0.
.EDA 1 5%56M
DE 1 5%35 0.
AB 1 5%49 0.
.BAC 1 (5%33M
C
E
B
A
D
. D; 1 68%:6 0.
. ;C 1 66%63 0.
. H; 1 66%63 0.
. )L 1 9%7: 0.
. MN 1 9%76 0.
. )K 1 7%5( 0.
. )M 1 7%5( 0.
. ;S 1 2%27 0.
. &< 1 2%27 0.
D
N
M
<
&
H
;
O
L
)
S
K
C