Home » Blog » Prove that no equilateral triangle can have all of vertices on lattice points

Prove that no equilateral triangle can have all of vertices on lattice points

Prove that an equilateral triangle T cannot have all of vertices on lattice points, i.e., points (x,y) such that both x,y are integers.


Proof. Suppose there exists such an equilateral triangle T. Then,

    \[ T = A \cup B \]

for two disjoint, congruent right triangles A, B. Since the vertices of T are at lattice points, we know the altitude from the vertex to the base must pass through h lattice points (where h is the height of T). Therefore, denoting the lattice points on this altitude by V_B = h+1, we have

    \[ B_T = B_A + B_B -V_B + 2, \qquad I_T = I_A + I_B +V_B - 2. \]

Since T is a polygon with lattice point vertices we know by the previous exercise, that a(T) = I_T + \frac{1}{2} B_T -1. Further, by Exercise #2 of this section, we know a(T) = \frac{1}{2} bh. So,

    \begin{align*}  &&I_T + \frac{1}{2}B_T - 1 &= (I_A + I_B + V_B - 2) + \frac{1}{2} (B_A + B_B - V_B+2) \\ \implies && I_T + \frac{1}{2}B_T - 1 &= 2I_A + B_A - 2 + \frac{1}{2} V_B &(B_A = B_B, I_A = I_B)\\ \implies && I_T + \frac{1}{2} B_T - 1 &= 2I_A + B_A - 2 + \frac{1}{2}(h+1) &(V_B = h+1) \\ \implies && I_T + \frac{1}{2} B_t - 1 &= 2(a(A)) + \frac{1}{2}(h+1)  \end{align*}

But, \frac{1}{2} a(T) = a(A) = a(B), so,

    \[ I_T + \frac{1}{2} B_T - 1 &= a(T) + \frac{1}{2}(h+1) \qquad \implies \qquad a(T) = a(T) + \frac{1}{2}(h+1). \]

But, h > 0, so this is a contradiction. Therefore, T cannot have its vertices at lattice points and be equilateral. \qquad \blacksquare

4 comments

  1. Supreeth says:

    Will this be a valid alternate proof?

    Because the triangle is equilateral with all of its coordinates being lattice points, its height is going to be sqrt(3)*a/4 (where a is the length of one of its sides). This means that the area, 0.5bh is irrational; but Pick’s formula always gives you a rational result. Hence, contradiction.

Point out an error, ask a question, offer an alternative solution (to use Latex type [latexpage] at the top of your comment):