A New Approach to Proving the Pythagorean Theorem

C-K Shene
First Draft: August 21, 2023
Typos Corrected and Abstract and Appendix Added: September 19, 2023

Abstract
Ne’Kiya D. Jackson and Calcea Rujean Johnson presented a trigonometric proof of the
Pythagorean Theorem at the 2023 AMS Spring Southeastern Sectional Meeting claiming that
it is an impossible proof. They cited a false claim in Loomis’ 1907 book “There are no
trigonometric proofs. . . . . . . Trigonometry is because the Pythagorean Proposition is.” This
manuscript presents a new method based on similarity and geometric progression with which
a pure geometrical proof is given. Additionally, this manuscript also discusses some proofs in
Loomis’ book and provides two new proofs using the concept of the Lemoine Point. Finally,
the Appendix has Zimba’s original proof of the angle difference identities for sin() and cos()
without using the Pythagorean Theorem. It also includes a proof of the angle sum identities
for sin() and cos() without using the Pythagorean Theorem. Both results can be used to prove
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. As a result, Loomis’ claim is false and the proof of Jackson-Johnson
can be quickly replaced by a purely geometrical one.

A proof of the Pythagorean Theorem using trigonometry was presented at the AMS Spring
Southeastern Sectional Meeting on March 18, 2023 by Ne’Kiya D. Jackson and Calcea Rujean
Johnson [4]. This was reported widely by the media such as The Guardian [11], Popular Mechan-
ics [8] and Scientific American [10]. Unfortunately, the authors and some reports kept suggesting
that a trigonometric proof is “impossible.” They all cited a 1907 book The Pythagorean Proposition
by Elisha Scott Loomis [6, second edition, pp. 244-245] in which Loomis stated the following:

Facing forward the thoughtful reader may raise the question: Are there any proofs
based upon the science of trigonometry or analytical geometry?
There are no trigonometric proofs, because all the fundamental formulae of trigonom-
etry are themselves based upon the truth of the Pythagorean Theorem; because of this
theorem we say sin2 A + cos2 A = 1, etc. Trigonometry is because the Pythagorean
Theorem is [6, p.244].

This is false, because Zimba [12] showed that the validity of cos(α − β) = cos(α) cos(β) +
sin(α) sin(β) and sin(α − β) = sin(α) cos(β) − cos(α) sin(β) is independent of the Pythagorean
Theorem which can be proved using cos(α − β) by setting α = β. This author is not sure whether
there were publications between Loomis’ book and Zimba’s paper that demonstrated similar re-
sults; however, Zimba’s work proved that Loomis’ claim indeed is false.
We will develop a simple method based on similarity and geometric progression to prove the
Pythagorean Theorem. While this method can be applied to more general geometric shapes, we

1
only focus on right triangles. In what follows, Section 1 presents our method; Section 2 shows
that some classical proofs in Loomis’ book can be easily converted to use this technique, Section 3
presents Jackson and Johnson’s proof without using trigonometry; Section 4 discusses the origi-
nal trigonometrical version; Section 5 has two new proofs based on the Lemoine Point or Grebe
Point or Symmedian Point, one of which is a direct one and is very simple while the other uses
this new method; and Section 6 has our conclusions. Section 2 is divided into three subsections:
Section 2.1 discusses proofs in which square dissection is used, Section 2.2 has simple proofs
that use the given right triangle directly, and Section 2.3 includes a proof which has a square on
the hypothenuse. Finally, the Appendix includes Zimba’s proof showing that the angle difference
identities for sin() and cos() can be derived without using the Pythagorean Theorem and the iden-
tity sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. Following Zimba’s idea, we show that the angle sum identities for sin()
and cos() are independent of the Pythagorean Theorem. Furthermore, from the angle sum iden-
tities the sum-to-product identities are derived from which the derivatives of sin() and cos() are
computed independently of the Pythagorean Theorem. Then, we use the double angle identities
and L’Hôpital’s Rule to prove sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. Therefore, this chain of reasoning suggests
that “Trigonometry is because the Pythagorean Theorem is” is completely false.

1 The Main Idea

The main idea is simple. Given a figure A and a figure B ⊆ A, if B is similar to A with a scaling
factor ρ (i.e., a side q of B and its corresponding side p of A satisfying q = ρ · p, where 0 < ρ < 1),
then A (A) = A (A − B) + A (B), where A (X) denotes the area of X. Note that a scaling factor
ρ for length induces a scaling factor ρ2 for area. Because B ∼ A, A (B) = ρ2 A (A), we have
A (A) = A (A − B) + A (B) = A (A − B) + ρ2 A (A) and A (A) = A (A − B) + ρ2 (A (A − B) + A (B)).
Therefore, we have

A (A) = A (A − B) + ρ2 A (A − B) + ρ4 A (A)
= A (A − B) + ρ2 A (A − B) + ρ4 (A (A − B) + A (B))
= A (A − B) + ρ2 A (A − B) + ρ4 A (A − B) + ρ4 A (B) · · ·
···
A (A − B) 1 + ρ2 + ρ4 + ρ6 + · · ·


=
A (A − B)
= (1)
1 − ρ2

Hence, if we are able to find B and ρ and compute A (A − B), it is easy to find A (A).
As for line segment length, the scaling factor is only ρ. If a point Z is selected on a line segment
XY , we have of XY = XZ + ZY . Let ρ = ZY /XY . Based on the idea above we have

XZ
XY = XZ + ρXZ + ρ2 XZ + ρ4 XZ + · · · = (2)
1−ρ

2
2 Re-Do Some Simple Classical Proofs
Many proofs in Loomis’ book [6] can easily be redone with the new method. The next few sub-
sections discuss how this conversion can be done easily. First, a figure A is constructed from the
given right triangle of sides a < b < c with c being the hypotenuse. Second, find a subfigure B that
is similar to A and the area of A − B can be computed easily. Third, use our method to compute
the area of figure A. Fourth, find another way to compute the area of A without using B. Finally,
equating the two results followed by some simplification yields the desired result. However, we
have to point out that for the Pythagorean Theorem, the length of the hypotenuse c should be used
in the first stage and should not be cancelled out because c is typically not used in the second stage.

2.1 Proofs Involving the Use of a Square

In Figure 1(a) the square has side length a + b and the right triangle is repeated four times inside
the square. The scaling factor going from the outer square to the inner one is ρ = c/(a + b) and
hence we have
1 (a + b)2
=
1 − ρ2 (a + b)2 − c2
Therefore, the area of the square is
(a + b)2
 
2 1
(a + b) = 4 a·b ×
2 (a + b)2 − c2
After a simplification, we get a2 + b2 = c2 (Loomis [6, Proof Thirty-Three, p. 48]).
Figure 1(b) is another commonly seen proof in which the inner square has side length b − a.
The scaling factor is ρ = (b − a)/c and 1/(1 − ρ2 ) = c2 /(c2 − (b − a)2 ). The area of the square is
computed as follows:
c2
 
2 1
c =4 a·b × 2
2 c − (b − a)2
Again, a simple simplification yields a2 + b2 = c2 .
In Loomis [6, Proof Two Hundred Fifteen, p. 221] a proof similar to the above one is shown.
Given a right triangle △ABC (Figure 1(c)), construct a square of side length b on side AC and drop
←
→ ←→
a penpendicular from C to AB meeting it at F. Then, drop a perpendicular from D to CF meeting it
←→ ←→
at G and perpendiculars from E to DG and AB meeting them at H and K, respectively. It is obvious
that △AFC ∼ = △CGD ∼ = △DHE ∼ = △EKA and the lengths of AK and CF are equal. Furthermore,
because △ABC ∼ △ACF, we have
a·b b2 b(b − a)
p = AK = , p + q = AF = and q = KF = AF − AK =
c c c
Hence, the sum of the areas of the four right triangles is
1 ab3
 
1
4 p(p + q) = (3)
2 2 c2

3
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 1: Proofs Involving the Use of Squares

The scaling factor going from square ACDE to square FGHK is

q (b/c)(b − a) b − a 1 c2
ρ= = = and =
b c c 1 − ρ2 c2 − (b − a)2

The area of the outer square is

1 ab3 1 ab3 c2 2ab3

   
1
A (ACDE) = = 4 =
2 c2 1 − ρ2 2 c2 c2 − (b − a)2 c2 − (b − a)2

However, because A (ACDE) = b2 which is equal to the above result, we have

2ab3
b2 =
c2 − (b − a)2

Simplifying yields c2 = a2 + b2 .
Some proofs in Loomis [6] share the same technique, although the division of the sides of the
square may not be a : b. For example, in Loomis [6, Proof Sixty-Three, p. 137], the division of the
side c square is exactly a : b; but other rectangles and squares are needed to complete the proof.
Loomis [6, Proof Thirty-Three, p.48] is exactly the same as shown in Figure 1(b). Loomis [6,
Proof One Hundred Thirty-Three, p. 177] is similar to Figure 1(c), but the division of side c is
ac/b : c(b − a)/b. Other proofs in Loomis [6] are similar (e.g., Proofs 131–132, Proofs 134–137,
etc.) and use different ways of cutting the square of side c. These proofs can also be transformed
to use the technique presented here.

2.2 Proofs Based on Similar Right Triangles Inside or Outside the Given One
←
→ ← →
Consider △ABC in Figure 2(a), where D is the perpendicular foot from C to side AB. Line CD
divides △ABC into two smaller triangles both similar to △ABC (Loomis [6, Proof One, p. 23]).

4
 (a) (b)

Figure 2: Very Simple Proofs Using the Given Triangle Directly

From △CDB ∼ △ACB, we have h = (a · b)/c and k = a2 /c. Therefore, we have

1 1  a 2
A (△CBD) = · h · k = (a · b) (4)
2 2 c
Because △ACD ∼ △ABC, the scaling factor ρ from △ABC to △ACD is ρ = h/c = b/c. Hence,
we have
A (△CBD) 1 a3 b
A (△ABC) = = 2 (5)
1 − ρ2 2 c − b2
Because we also have A (△ABC) = (a · b)/2, the following holds:

1 1 a3 b
a·b = 2
2 2 c − b2
After a simple simplification, we have
a2
1=
c 2 − b2
This leads to c2 = a2 + b2 , the desired result.
As a direct consequence of the above mentioned proof, a very similar one was discussed in the
←
→
Cut the Knot site [1], credited to John Arioni. From D drop a perpendicular to AC meeting it at E
(Figure 2(a)). Let p = DE and q = CE. Because △DCE ∼ △ABC, we have p = (a · b2 )/c2 and
q = (a2 b)/c2 . The area of trapezoid BCED is:

1 a3 b 2
A (BCED) = (p + a) · q = (b + c2 ) (6)
2 2c4
The scaling factor going from △ABC to △ADE is ρ = p/a = (b/c)2 and

1 c4
2
= 2
1−ρ (c − b )(c2 + b2 )
2

5
Then, the area of △ABC is

a3 b 2 c4 a3 b
 
2
A (ABC) = (b + c ) =
2c4 (c2 − b2 )(c2 + b2 ) 2(c2 − b2 )

However, because A (ABC) = (a · b)/2, we have

1 a3 b
(a · b) =
2 2(c2 − b2 )

Again, we have c2 = a2 + b2 .
Proofs Three and Four in Loomis [6, p. 26] share the same idea as discussed in the first proof
in this section. We only discuss Proof Four here and Proof Three can be obtained exactly the
←→
same way. In Figure 2(b), △ABC is the given right triangle. Extend the hypotenuse AB to D so
←→ ←→ ←
→
that BD = BC = a, and construct a line DE perpendicular to AB meeting AC at E. It is obvious
that △BDE ∼ = △BCE and △AED ∼ △ABC. As a result, we have p = (a/b)(a + c). The area of
quadrilateral BCED is
a2 (a + c)
 
1
A (BCED) = 2 a · p =
2 b
The scaling factor ρ bringing △AED to △ABC is

a b
ρ= =
p a+c
Consequently, we have

A (BCED) a2 (a + c)3
A (AED) = =
1 − ρ2 b ((a + c)2 − b2 )

However. A (AED) may also be calculated as

1 1 a(a + c)2
A (AED) = p(a + c) =
2 2 b
Both results must agree:
a2 (a + c)3 1 a(a + c)2
=
b ((a + c)2 − b2 ) 2 b
A simple simplification yields c2 = a2 + b2 .

2.3 Proofs with Squares Standing on the Sides of a Right Triangle

There are many proofs with a square standing on a side of a right triangle, and some of these proofs
can easily be adapted for our method. The following is taken from Loomis [6, Proof Nineteen, p.

6
43] (Figure 3). Because of △A1 AA2 ∼ △ABC and △BB1 B2 ∼ △ABC, we have p = (bc)/a and
q = (ca)/b. As a result, the length of side A1 B1 is:
c
A1 B1 = p + c + q = (ab + a2 + b2 )
ab
The area of the trapezoid ABB1 A1 is

1 c2 (a + b)2
A (AA1 B1 B) = (c + A1 B1 ) · c = ·
2 2 ab
The scaling factor ρ is the ratio of c and A1 B1

c ab
ρ= =
A1 B1 ab + a2 + b2
Hence, the area of △CA1 B1 is calculated from the area of the trapezoid ABB1 A1 and the scaling
factor ρ as follows:

A (ABB1 A1 ) 1 c2 (ab + a2 + b2 )2
A (CA1 B1 ) = = · (7)
1 − ρ2 2 ab(a2 + b2 )

Because of similarity, the lengths of side CA1 and CB1 are simply CA1 = b/ρ and CB1 = a/ρ.
Consequently, the area of △CA1 B1 is also calculated as follows:

1 1 ab 1 (ab + a2 + b2 )2
A (CA1 B1 ) = CA1 ·CB1 = · = ·
2 2 ρ2 2 ab

The results in the above and in Eqn. (7) must be equal:

1 c2 (ab + a2 + b2 )2 1 (ab + a2 + b2 )2
· = ·
2 ab(a2 + b2 ) 2 ab

Simplifying the above yields c2 = a2 + b2 .

It does not have to use area in this particular case. Because △ABC ∼ △A1 B1C, the altitude
←→ ←−→
from from C to AB and the altitude from C to A1 B1 are h = (a · b)/c and h + c = (a · b + c2 )/c,
respectively, and hence ρ can also be computed as follows:

h a·b
ρ′ = =
h + c a · b + c2

Because ρ = ρ′ , c2 = a2 + b2 follows immediately.

7
 Figure 3: A Square on Side c (i.e., AB)

3 Jackson and Johnson’s Proof without Trigonometry

This section will re-do the proof of Ne’Kiya D. Jackson and Calcea Rujean Johnson. The con-
struction is similar, but the proof is completely geometrical without the use of trigonometry. Given
a right triangle △ABC with ∠A = α, ∠B = β > α, ∠C = 90◦ , a = BC, b = CA and c = AB (Fig-
ure 4(a)). Construct a triangle △XY0 Z0 so that ∠Y0 = α and ∠Z0 = α + 90◦ , where x = Y0 Z0 is
known. Note that this construction does not work if α = β = 45◦ because X is at infinity and the
←→
area of △XY0 Z0 is not finite. From Z0 drop a vertical line meeting XY0 at Y1 and then draw a
←→
horizontal line from Y1 meeting XZ0 at Z1 . Let p = Y0Y1 , q = Z0 Z1 , r = Y1 Z1 and h = Z0Y1 .
Because △ABC ∼ △Y0Y1 Z0 , we have h = x(a/b) and p = x(c/b). Because △ABC ∼ △Z0 Z1Y1 ,
we have q = h(c/b) = x(ac/b2 ) and r = x(a/b)2 . As a result, the area of trapezoid Y0 Z0 Z1Y1 is

1 1
  a 2   xa  x2 a(a2 + b2 )
A (Y0 Z0 Z1Y1 ) = (x + r) · h = x + x · = (8)
2 2 b b 2 b3

Because △XY0 Z0 ∼ △XY1 Z1 and r/x = (a/b)2 , the scaling factor from △XY0 Z0 to △XY1 Z1 is
ρ = (a/b)2 . Therefore, the area of △XY0 Z0 is:

A (Y0 Z0 Z1Y1 ) x2 ab
A (△XY0 Z0 ) = = (9)
1 − ρ2 2 b2 − a2

Then, we determine the lengths of XY0 and XZ0 . Because we know Y0Y1 = p = x(c/b) and
ρ = (a/b)2 , our method (Eqn. (2)) yields

p bc q ac
XY0 = =x 2 and XZ0 = =x 2 (10)
1−ρ b − a2 1−ρ b − a2
←→ ←→
Because ∠Y0 in △XY0 Z0 is α, constructing a line perpendicular to XY0 at Y0 meeting XZ0 at X ′
yields △X ′Y0 Z0 which has ∠Y0 = ∠Z0 = β and ∠X ′ = 2α (Figure 4(b)).

8
 (a) (b)

Figure 4: Jackson and Johnson’s Proof

It is easy to see that the height k on side Y0 Z0 is k = (x/2)(b/a), and we have

x2 b
 
′ 1
A (△X Y0 Z0 ) = (x · k) = 2 (11)
2 2 a

The length t of side X ′Y0 is t = (x/2)(c/a). Therefore, the area of triangle △XY0 X ′ is

x2 b c2
  
′ 1 1 x c b·c
A (△XY0 X ) = t · XY0 = · · x 2 = · · (12)
2 2 2 a b − a2 22 a b2 − a2

The area of △XY0 X ′ may also be calculated as the sum of the areas of △X ′Y0 Z0 and △XY0 Z0 :

x2 b x2 x2 b a2 + b2
 
′ ′ ab
A (△XY0 X ) = A (△XY0 Z0 ) + A (△X Y0 Z0 ) = 2 + · 2 = · · (13)
2 a 2 b − a2 2 2a b2 − a2

Because the areas computed by Eqn. (12) and Eqn. (13) are the same, we have

x2 b c2 x 2 b a2 + b2
· · = · ·
22 a b 2 − a 2 2 2a b2 − a2

After a simple simplification, we have the desired result is c2 = a2 + b2 .

If α = β = 45◦ , the altitude on the hypotenuse is c/2. The area of the right triangle can be
computed in two ways: a2 /2 and ((c/2)·c)/2. Therefore, a2 /2 = ((c/2)·c)/2 implies a2 +a2 = c2 .

4 Jackson and Johnson’s Original Proof

The original proof of Jackson and Johnson used trigonometry based on side lengths XY0 and XX ′
and the law of sines that is independent of the Pythagorean Theorem and sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) =

9
1 [7, 9]. In Jackson and Johnson’s original proof we have x = Y0 Z0 = 2a, k = b and t = X ′Y0 = c
(Figure 4(b)) and the following holds:

2abc 2a2 c c(b2 + a2 )

XY0 = , XZ0 = and XX ′ = XZ0 + c =
b2 − a2 b2 − a2 b 2 − a2
Therefore, we have
XY0 2ab
sin(2α) = sin(∠Y0 X ′ Z0 ) = = 2 (14)
XX ′ a + b2
From △X ′Y0 Z0 , the law of sines gives

sin(2α) sin(β) (b/c) b

= = = 2
2a c c c
Therefore, sin(2α) = (2ab)/c2 must agree with the sin(2α) calculated in Eqn. (14). An obvious
simplification yields c2 = a2 + b2 . Because we know sin(2α) = 2ab/(a2 + b2 ), the above discus-
sion yields the Pythagorean Theorem and the double angle formula for sin(x) at the same time.
Obviously, the only difference between Jackson and Johnson’s original proof and the proof in the
previous section is the use of length and trigonometry vs. the use of area.

5 A Possible New Proof

Suppose a right triangle △ABC has all three squares on its sides (Figure 5). Extending the outer
side of each square creates a similar right triangle △A0 B0C0 . It is clear that △ABC ∼ △A0 B0C0 .
Because the corresponding sides are parallel, their intersection points are collinear (i.e., meeting
at the line at infinity) and by Desargues’s Theorem the line joining the corresponding vertices are
concurrent at a point K. This point K is referred to as the Lemoine or Grebe or Symmedian point
of △ABC and △A0 B0C0 (Gallatly [2, Chap X, p.86]). In fact, K is the homothetic center of △ABC
and △A0 B0C0 . It is also known as the center of similarity or center of similitude of △ABC and
△A0 B0C0 . For a right triangle, it is important to note that K is the midpoint of the altitude from C
←→
to its opposite side AB. Let the distance from K to sides a, b and c be pa , pb and pc , respectively.
An important property of K is pa : pb : pc = a : b : c (Honsberger [3, p. 59]). Because the altitude
from vertex C to its opposite side is (ab)/c, we have pc = (ab)/(2c) and hence pa = (a2 b)/(2c2 )
and pb = (ab2 )/(2c2 ). Therefore, the area of △ABC is the sum of three smaller triangles △KAB,
△KBC and △KCA:

a · b a2 b2 a · b a2 + b2 + c2
 
1 1
A (ABC) = (pa · a + pb · b + pc · c) = + + = ·
2 2 2c2 2c2 2 2 2c2

Because the above is equal to (ab)/2, after a simple simplification we have c2 = a2 + b2 . This is a
direct proof of the Pythagorean Theorem.

10
 Figure 5: A Symmedian Point Based Proof

Using the areas of the three trapezoids A (AA0 B0 B), A (BB0C0C) and A (CC0 A0 A) the area of
△A0 B0C0 is calculated easily with our method. The area of △A0 B0C0 may also be calculated as
(A0C0 · B0C0 )/2. As a result, both must agree and the Pythagorean Theorem follows.
Because △ABC ∼ △A0 B0C0 , c : c0 = pc /(pc + c) and hence the scaling factor going from
△A0 B0C0 to △ABC is
a·b 1 a · b + 2c2 1 a · b + 2c2
ρ= , = and = (15)
a · b + 2c2 ρ a·b 1−ρ 2c2
Because a0 = a/ρ, b0 = b/ρ and c0 = c/ρ, the areas of trapezoids AA0C0C, BC0 B0 B and AA0 B0 B
are as follows:
a2
   
1 a 1
A (AA0C0C) = a+ ·a = 1+
2 ρ 2 ρ
b2
   
1 b 1
A (BC0 B0 B) = b+ ·b = 1+
2 ρ 2 ρ
2
   
1 c c 1
A (AA0 B0 B) = c+ ·c = 1+
2 ρ 2 ρ
The sum of all three trapezoids is
1 a2 + b2 + c2
 
A (outer ring of △ABC) = 1 +
ρ 2
Therefore, the area of △A0 B0C0 according to our method is
a2 + b2 + c2 1 a2 + b2 + c2
 
1 1
A (A0 B0C0 ) = 1+ × = (16)
2 ρ 1 − ρ2 2 ρ(1 − ρ)
The area of △A0 B0C0 can also be computed as follows:
   
1 1 a b 1 a·b
A (△A0 B0C0 ) = A0C0 · B0C0 = · = · 2
2 2 ρ ρ 2 ρ

11
This result must agree with the one shown in Eqn. (16), and after plugging the value of ρ (Eqn.
(15) followed by a very simple simplification we have c2 = a2 + b2 .

6 Conclusions
We developed an easy and effective way for proving the Pythagorean Theorem. This method is
based on a simple principle of similarity. Given a shape A and a similar shape B ⊆ A, if the
scaling factor from A to B is ρ (0 < ρ < 1), then the area of A is computed as A (A) = A (A −
B)/(1 − ρ2 ). This method is applied to several classical proofs in Lommis [6] and to new proofs.
In particular, the use of trigonometry in Jackson and Johnson’s proof [4] is eliminated becoming
a geometrical one. With the help of the Lemoine Point, we have a short and simple direct proof
and another one based on our method. Note that even though this method is only applied to right
triangles, it can be used with general shapes. The Appendix includes Zimba’s proof of the angle
difference identities of sin() and cos() being independent of the Pythagorean Theorem. We also
show that a similar technique can be used to prove the angle sum identities being independent of the
Pythagorean Theorem. Then, the computation of the derivatives of sin() and cos() is derived from
the angle sum identities, and, finally, with the help of L’Hôpital’s Rule the double angle identities
are used to proof sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. Consequently, this manuscript successfully demonstrated
that many fundamental formulae of trigonometry are independent of the Pythagorean Theorem and
the sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1 identity.

A Proofs of Some Important Trigonometric Identities

In this section, we present Zimba’s original proof in [12] that the angle difference identities for
sin() and cos() are independent of the Pythagorean Theorem and the identity sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) =
1. With a similar technique, we prove that the angle sum identities for sin() and cos() are also
independent of the Pythagorean Theorem. Furthermore, the derivative computation of sin() and
cos() share the same property and the double angle identities can be used to prove the identity
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. This firmly shows that Loomis’s claim is false and that even though analytic
geometry uses the Cartesian Coordinate System many fundamental results are independent of the
Pythagorean Theorem and the identity sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1.

A.1 Zimba’s Proof of the Angle Difference Identities

Without loss of generality, we assume 0 < β ≤ α < 90◦ in this section. Consider Figure 6(a). Line
←→ ←→
OQ makes an angle of α − β with the x-axis, where OQ = 1. Let line OP make an angle of β with
←→ ←→ ←
→
OQ, where P is the perpendicular foot from Q to OP. Thus, OP makes an angle of α with the
x-axis. From P and Q drop perpendiculars to the x-axis meeting it at S and T . Therefore, we have
QT = sin(α − β) and OT = cos(α − β). From △OPQ we have PQ = sin(β) and OP = cos(β).

12
 (a) (b)

Figure 6: The Angle Difference and Angle Sum Identities

In △OPS, because sin(α) = PS/PO = PS/ cos(β) we have PS = sin(α) cos(β). Similarly, we
←
→
have OS = cos(α) cos(β). From Q drop a perpendicular to PS meeting it at R. Note that ∠P
of △PQR is α. In △PQR, because sin(α) = QR/QP = QR/ sin(β) we have QR = sin(α) sin(β).
Similarly, we have PR = cos(α) sin(β). Consequently, the desired results are as follows:
sin(α − β) = QT = PS − PR = sin(α) cos(β) − cos(α) sin(β)
cos(α − β) = OS + ST = OS + RQ = cos(α) cos(β) + sin(α) sin(β)
If α = β, we have the following:
1 = cos(0) = cos(α − α) = cos2 (α) + sin2 (α)

A.2 The Angle Sum Identities

We shall prove the angle sum identities for sin() and cos() based on Zimba’s approach. From O
←
→
construct a line OP that makes an angle of α + β with the x-axis and OP = 1 (Figure 6(b)). From
←→
O construct a line OQ that makes an angle α with the x-axis such that Q is the perpendicular foot
←→ ←→ ←→
from P to OQ. In this way, the angle between OP and OQ is β. Let the perpendicular feet from P
←
→
and Q to the x-axis be S and T . From Q construct a perpendicular to PS meetint it at R. Hence, we
have sin(α + β) = PS, cos(α + β) = OS, sin(β) = PQ and cos(β) = OQ.
From △OQT , because sin(α) = QT /QO = QT / cos(β) we have QT = sin(α) cos(β). Simi-
larly, we have OT = cos(α) cos(β). From △PQR, because sin(α) = QR/QP = QR/ sin(β) we have
QR = sin(α) sin(β). Similarly, we have PR = cos(α) sin(β). Therefore, we have:
sin(α + β) = PR + RS = sin(α) cos(β) + cos(α) sin(β)
cos(α + β) = OT − ST = cos(α) cos(β) − sin(α) sin(β)

13
Consequently, the angle sum identities for sin() and cos() are independent of the Pythagorean
Theorem and sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1.

A.3 sin′ () and cos′ () Are Independent of the Pythagorean Theorem

From the angle sum and angle difference identities we have one of the sum-to-product identities:
   
p+q p−q
sin(p) − sin(q) = 2 cos sin
2 2

Then, the derivative of sin() is computed as follows:

sin(x + h) − sin(x)
sin′ (x) = lim
h→0 h
2 cos 2x+h sin 2h



2
= lim
 h  
h→0
 
2x + h sin(h/2)
= lim cos · lim
h→0 2 h→0 h/2
= cos(x)

As h → 0, the first term approaches cos(x) while the second approaches 1. Note that limh→0 sin(h)/h =
1 does not dependent on the Pythagorean Theorem. Because cos(x) = sin(π/2 − x), by the Chain
Rule we have cos′ (x) = sin′ (π/2 − x) = cos(π/2 − x)(π/2 − x)′ = − cos(π/2 − x) = − sin(x).
Therefore, the alculation of sin′ (x) and cos′ (x) is independent of the Pythagorean Theorem.

A.4 The Double Angle Identities

We have shown that sin(α ± β), cos(α ± β) and the derivatives of sin() and cos() are all in-
dependent of the Pythagorean Theorem and the identity sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1. We now prove
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1 with the double angle identities:

sin(2α) = 2 sin(α) cos(α)

cos(2α) = cos2 (α) − sin2 (α)

Because of the following:

x x
sin(x) = 2 sin cos
 x2  2 
x
2 2
cos(x) = cos − sin
2 2
we have  x  x 2
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = sin2 + cos2
2 2

14
With the same technique, we have:
 x  x 2
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = sin2 + cos2
2 2
 x  2 2
2 2 x
= sin + cos
4 4
 x  x 22
= sin2 2 + cos2 2
2 2
···
 x  x 2n
= sin2 n + cos2 n
2 2
We need to prove the following:
h x  x i2n
lim sin2 n + cos2 n =1
n→∞ 2 2
The left-hand side of the above can be rewritten as
h x  x i2n   x  x 
sin2 n + cos2 n = exp 2n ln sin2 n + cos2 n
2 2 2 2


!
ln sin2 2xn + cos2 2xn


= exp 1
2n

Then, a simple application of L’Hôpital’s Rule yields the result of the limit being 1 and hence
sin2 (x) + cos2 (x) = 1 holds.

References
[1] Alexander Bogomolny, Cut the Knot, available at http://www.cut-the-knot.org/
pythagoras/Proof100.shtml (retrieved August 10, 2023).

[2] William Gallatly, The Modern Geometry of the Triangle, 2nd edition, Francis Hodgson, Lon-
don, 1910.

[3] Ross Honsberger, Episodes in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Euclidean Geometry, The
Mathematical Association of American, 1995.

[4] Ne’Kiya D. Jackson and Calcea Rujean Johnson, An Impossible Proof Of Pythagoras, AMS
Spring Southeastern Sectional Meeting, March 18, 2023 (https://meetings.ams.org/
math/spring2023se/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/23621).

[5] Zsolt Lengvárszky, Proving the Pythagorean Theorem via Infinite Dissections, The American
Mathematical Monthly, Vol. 120 (2013), No. 8 (October), pp. 751–753.

15
 [6] Elisha Scott Loomis, The Pythagorean Proposition, 2nd edition, The National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics, 1940.

[7] MathTrain, How High Schools Proved Pythagoras Using Just Trig! (and Some Other Stuffs),
YouTube video, 2023 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQD6lDwFmCc).

[8] Darren Orf, Teens Have Proven the Pythagorean Theorem With Trigonom-
etry. That Should Be Impossible, Popular Mechanics, March 31,
2023 (https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/math/a43469593/
high-schoolers-prove-pythagorean-theorem-using-trigonometry/).

[9] Polymathematic, Pythagoras Would Be Proud: High School Students’ New Proof of the
Pythagorean Theorem [TRIGONOMETRY], YouTube video 2023 (https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=p6j2nZKwf20).

[10] Leila Sloman, 2 High School Students Prove Pythagorean Theorem. Here’s What That Means,
Scientific American, April 10, 2023 (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/
2-high-school-students-prove-pythagorean-theorem-heres-what-that-means/).

[11] Ramon Antonio Vargas, US teens say they have new proof for 2,000-year-old mathemati-
cal theorem, The Gaurdian, March 24, 2023 (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/
2023/mar/24/new-orleans-pythagoras-theorem-trigonometry-prove).

[12] Jason Zimba, On the Possibility of Trigonometric Proofs of the Pythagorean Theorem, Forum
Geometricorum: A Journal on Classical Euclidean Geometry, Vol. 9 (2009), pp. 275–278.

16