Almagest Book I: Circular Lemmas for Spherical Trigonometry

As noted in the previous Almagest post, I wanted to break this next set of lemma off because they use a new mathematical term: Crd arc.

The term is very simple. In fact, the name’s on the tin. It refers to the chord subtended by a specific arc. So let’s dive right in to the next proof and see how it’s used:

As always, the givens: AZ and GH are both perpendicular to BD which is a diameter.

Since they’re both perpendicular to BD, they’re parallel to one another and since AG connects them, EAZ and EGH are congruent as are AEZ and GEH. This makes AEZ and EGH similar triangles1.

Similar triangles means we can take ratios of their sides to be equal so:

AZGH=AEEG

And here’s where the new terminology comes in. Let’s start by noting that if we extend AZ all the way across the circle, that would be doubling it in length. In addition, there would now be another point lying on the perimeter directly across from A. Since we would now have a line that begins and ends on the circle, that’s the definition of a chord. And what arc would subtend it? It would be arc2AB.

Writing that out we can state:

2AZ=Crdarc2AB

But, in this setup we don’t really have 2AZ. We have AZ so let’s clear that 2 out by dividing both sides by it:

AZ=12Crdarc2AB

We can do the exact same for GH and state:

GH=12Crdarc2BG

Jumping back a bit, we’d determined AZGH=AEEG. And sinse we now have AZ and GH, we can take their ratio to get something to substitute in. Since the halves will cancel, we get:

AZGH=Crdarc2ABCrdarc2BG

Substituting that into our equation from above:

AEEG=Crdarc2ABCrdarc2BG

Which is the next of Ptolemy’s lemma. [13.3]

Next Ptolemy states that if we know Crdarc2ABCrdarc2BG and arcAG we can determine arcAB and arcBG. To demonstrate this, we examine another diagram.

Here, all points except Z remain unchanged (with the exception of H which has gone away since it is no longer needed for this proof). Now, DZ is drawn such that it is perpendicular to AG. As such,  DZ also bisects AG. Thus, if AG were given, we could determine DZ because ADZ is a right triangle, AD is a radius, and thus, we could apply the Pythagorean theorem.

And as a bonus, AZ is the arc subtended by ADZ. Since we spent a bunch of time going through the math to create the table of chords, we could then look up the angle that corresponds to that chord length, and use that to determine all of the angles in ADZ.

We’ll still assume AG is given, and Ptolemy now assumes that AEEG is as well (or Crdarc2ABCrdarc2BG. Ptolemy’s not exactly clear on which we’ll be having values for).

But if we know the total length of a line (AG), and the ratio of its parts(AEEG), then we can determine each of the parts individually. That’s not immediately obvious as to how so let’s take an example.

Say we know the total length of the line to be 10 parts. We’re told the ratio of the parts is 0.42857. Stating that mathematically:

a+b=10

ab=0.42857

Solve the first equation for a:

a=10b

Substitute into the second equation:

10bb=0.42857

Solve for b:

10bbb=0.42857

10b1=0.42857

10b=0.42857b

10=1.42857b

b=7

Substitute that into the first equation and you’ll find that a = 3.

Thus, if you know the length of the full line and the ratio of its parts, then you can find the individual pieces.

But now since we could know AE and we already knew AZ, we could subtract the two to find EZ. Again, we could use our table of chords to look up the angle that subtends it (EDZ). Add that to ADZ and you determine ADB. And since Ptolemy defines his circles to have a circumference of 360 parts, the arc subtended by an angle is equal to that angle. Which means if we know ADZ, we know arcAB.

Similarly, since we assumed we know the length of AG, we can again look up the central angle that would subtend it and since the angle and arc are the same as we just stated, that means we’d know arcAG. Subtracting arcAB we can then determine arcBG.

Next, we’ll derive another lemma similar to the last one.

Here BZ and GH are perpendicular to AH. This means that BEZ is similar to GEH. So again we can take the ratios of their sides to be equal:

GEBE=GHBZ

Again, we can notice that if we extend BZ and GH they would then be Crdarc2AB and Crdarc2GA (note we’re going the long way around with arcGA).

Writing that out gives us:

2(BZ)=Crdarc2AB

2(GH)=Crdarc2GA

Dividing both sides by 2:

BZ=12(Crdarc2AB)

GH=12(Crdarc2GA)

Taking the ratio GHBZ and cancelling the halves gives us:

GHBZ=Crdarc2GACrdarc2AB

Substituting from where we noted GEBE=GHBZ:

GEBE=Crdarc2GACrdarc2AB

That’s another lemma [13.4] we’ll keep on hand.

Ptolemy puts it to use with a remix on the previous diagram in order to prove that if we know arcBG as well as arc2GAarc2AB, we can determine arcAB.

Here DZBG which means it bisects BG. Therefore BDZ subtends half of arcBG. So if we know arcBG (which was one of the things Ptolemy assumes we’re going to know), since the central angle is the same and we’re dividing it in half, then we’ll know BDZ. If we know arcBG we can look up the chord length for BG and half of that will be BZ.

Taking stock, we’ve know two of the sides (BD since it’s a radius and BZ as we just noted) and an two angles (BDZ and BZD which is a right angle)  so we can determine DZ via the Pythagorean theorem and DBZ via subtraction of the other two angles from the 180º in a triangle.

So BDZ is completely known.

Jumping back to the proof setup, Ptolemy stated that it’s assumed we know arc2GAarc2AB which we previously proved is equal to EGBE. Again, if we know arcBG we can look up the chord length for BG. With these, we can determine EB.

Ptolemy simply says it’s true, but let’s make up some numbers to demonstrate this is true much the same as I did previously. Again, I’ll use 10 for the length of the total line since it’s nice and around. I’ll also use a ratio of EGBE=53. I’ll also pick BG=4. Writing all this out:

EGBE=53

EG=BE+4

Plugging the second equation into the first since it doesn’t need to be solved:

BE+4BE=53

Multiplying both sides by BE:

BE+4=53BE

Subtract BE from both sides:

4=23BE

Multiply by 32:

BE=6

So to restate what was said before the demonstration: if we know arcBG and EGBE we can determine BE. If we wanted to, we could add on BZ since we determined that as well, in order to get EZ. We’d also found DZ which gives us two of the three sides in right triangle BDE, so we can naturally figure out ED via the Pythagorean theorem.

From this, Ptolemy states that this should allow us to figure out EDZ but I can’t seem to figure out how. Looking up the angle that has a chord length corresponding to DZ doesn’t work because the table we derived only works if the chords ends are on one of Ptolemy’s unit circles and the angle is the central angle. If we used a bit of trigonometry it would be straightforward, but Ptolemy doesn’t use trig.

Regardless, the trig confirms that the angle is solvable which concludes the “preliminary theorems” Ptolemy wants to introduce in this section. There will still be one more theorem before moving on, but this is a special one known as Menelaus’ theorem and it’s notably different in character, so I’ll save that for another post.


  1. Angle-Angle similarity.