Please remember: the status of this text is draft. You have been granted access through the generosity of the editor. Please use the comments to help make suggestions or corrections.

Edition: 0.0.0-dev | March 03, 2014

Authority: SCTA

License Availablity: free, Published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License

Sources:

X:

4 Magnitudes are said to have a ratio to one another which are capable, when multiplied, of exceeding one another.

5 Magnitudes are said to be in the same ratio , the first to the second and the third to the fourth, when, if any equimultiples whatever be taken of the first and third, and any equimultiples whatever of the second and fourth, the former equimultiples alike exceed, are alike equal to, or alike fall short of, the latter equimultiples respectively taken in corresponding order.

7 When, of the equimultiples, the multiple of the first magnitude exceeds the multiple of the second, but the multiple of the third does not exceed the multiple of the fourth, then the first is said to have a greater ratio to the second than the third has to the fourth.

9 When three magnitudes are proportional, the first is said to have to the third the duplicate ratio of that which it has to the second.

10 When four magnitudes are continuously proportional, the first is said to have to the fourth the triplicate ratio of that which it has to the second, and so on continually, whatever be the proportion.

11 The term corresponding magnitudes is used of antecedents in relation to antecedents, and of consequents in relation to consequents.

12 Alternate ratio means taking the antecedent in relation to the antecedent and the consequent in relation to the consequent.

13 Inverse ratio means taking the consequent as antecedent in relation to the antecedent as consequent.

14 Composition of a ratio means taking the antecedent together with the consequent as one in relation to the consequent by itself.

15 Separation of a ratio means taking the excess by which the antecedent exceeds the consequent in relation to the consequent by itself.

16 Conversion of a ratio means taking the antecedent in relation to the excess by which the antecedent exceeds the consequent.

17 A ratio ex aequali arises when, there being several magnitudes and another set equal to them in multitude which taken two and two are in the same proportion, as the first is to the last among the first magnitudes, so is the first to the last among the second magnitudes;

18 Or, in other words, it means taking the extreme terms by virtue of the removal of the intermediate terms.

19 A perturbed proportion arises when, there being three magnitudes and another set equal to them in multitude, as antecedent is to consequent among the first magnitudes, so is antecedent to consequent among the second magnitudes, while, as the consequent is to a third among the first magnitudes, so is a third to the antecedent among the second magnitudes.

20 If there be any number of magnitudes whatever which are , respectively , equimultiples of any magnitudes equal in multitude , then , whatever multiple one of the magnitudes is of one , that multiple also will all be of all .

21 Let any number of magnitudes whatever AB , CD be respectively equimultiples of any magnitudes E , F equal in multitude; I say that, whatever multiple AB is of E , that multiple will AB , CD also be of E , F .

22 For, since AB is the same multiple of E that CD is of F , as many magnitudes as there are in AB equal to E , so many also are there in CD equal to F .

23 Let AB be divided into the magnitudes AG , GB equal to E , and CD into CH , HD equal to F ; then the multitude of the magnitudes AG , GB will be equal to the multitude of the magnitudes CH , HD .

24 Now, since AG is equal to E , and CH to F , therefore AG is equal to E , and AG , CH to E , F .

25For the same reason

26 GB is equal to E , and GB , HD to E , F ; therefore, as many magnitudes as there are in AB equal to E , so many also are there in AB , CD equal to E , F ; therefore, whatever multiple AB is of E , that multiple will AB , CD also be of E , F .

27Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

28 If a first magnitude be the same multiple of a second that a third is of a fourth , and a fifth also be the same multiple of the second that a sixth is of the fourth , the sum of the first and fifth will also be the same multiple of the second that the sum of the third and sixth is of the fourth .

29 Let a first magnitude, AB , be the same multiple of a second, C , that a third, DE , is of a fourth, F , and let a fifth, BG , also be the same multiple of the second, C , that a sixth, EH , is of the fourth F ; I say that the sum of the first and fifth, AG , will be the same multiple of the second, C , that the sum of the third and sixth, DH , is of the fourth, F .

30 For, since AB is the same multiple of C that DE is of F , therefore, as many magnitudes as there are in AB equal to C , so many also are there in DE equal to F .

31 For the same reason also, as many as there are in BG equal to C , so many are there also in EH equal to F ; therefore, as many as there are in the whole AG equal to C , so many also are there in the whole DH equal to F .

32 Therefore, whatever multiple AG is of C , that multiple also is DH of F .

33 Therefore the sum of the first and fifth, AG , is the same multiple of the second, C , that the sum of the third and sixth, DH , is of the fourth, F .

34Therefore etc. Q.E.D.

35 If a first magnitude be the same multiple of a second that a third is of a fourth , and if equimultiples be taken of the first and third , then also ex aequali the magnitudes taken will be equimultiples respectively , the one of the second and the other of the fourth .

36 Let a first magnitude A be the same multiple of a second B that a third C is of a fourth D , and let equimultiples EF , GH be taken of A , C ; I say that EF is the same multiple of B that GH is of D .

37 For, since EF is the same multiple of A that GH is of C , therefore, as many magnitudes as there are in EF equal to A , so many also are there in GH equal to C .

38 Let EF be divided into the magnitudes EK , KF equal to A , and GH into the magnitudes GL , LH equal to C ; then the multitude of the magnitudes EK , KF will be equal to the multitude of the magnitudes GL , LH .

39 And, since A is the same multiple of B that C is of D , while EK is equal to A , and GL to C , therefore EK is the same multiple of B that GL is of D .

40For the same reason

41 KF is the same multiple of B that LH is of D .

42 Since, then, a first magnitude EK is the same multiple of a second B that a third GL is of a fourth D , and a fifth KF is also the same multiple of the second B that a sixth LH is of the fourth D , therefore the sum of the first and fifth, EF , is also the same multiple of the second B that the sum of the third and sixth, GH , is of the fourth D . [ V. 2 ]

43Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

44 If a first magnitude have to a second the same ratio as a third to a fourth , any equimultiples whatever of the first and third will also have the same ratio to any equimultiples whatever of the second and fourth respectively , taken in corresponding order .

45 For let a first magnitude A have to a second B the same ratio as a third C to a fourth D ; and let equimultiples E , F be taken of A , C , and G , H other, chance, equimultiples of B , D ; I say that, as E is to G , so is F to H .

46 For let equimultiples K , L be taken of E , F , and other, chance, equimultiples M , N of G , H .

47 Since E is the same multiple of A that F is of C , and equimultiples K , L of E , F have been taken, therefore K is the same multiple of A that L is of C . [ V. 3 ]

48 For the same reason M is the same multiple of B that N is of D .

49 And, since, as A is to B , so is C to D , and of A , C equimultiples K , L have been taken, and of B , D other, chance, equimultiples M , N , therefore, if K is in excess of M , L also is in excess of N , if it is equal, equal, and if less, less. [ V. Def. 5 ]

50 And K , L are equimultiples of E , F , and M , N other, chance, equimultiples of G , H ; therefore, as E is to G , so is F to H . [ V. Def. 5 ]

51Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

52 If a magnitude be the same multiple of a magnitude that a part subtracted is of a part subtracted , the remainder will also be the same multiple of the remainder that the whole is of the whole .

53 For let the magnitude AB be the same multiple of the magnitude CD that the part AE subtracted is of the part CF subtracted; I say that the remainder EB is also the same multiple of the remainder FD that the whole AB is of the whole CD .

54 For, whatever multiple AE is of CF , let EB be made that multiple of CG .

55 Then, since AE is the same multiple of CF that EB is of GC , therefore AE is the same multiple of CF that AB is of GF . [ V. 1 ]

56 But, by the assumption, AE is the same multiple of CF that AB is of CD .

57 Therefore AB is the same multiple of each of the magnitudes GF , CD ; therefore GF is equal to CD .

58 Let CF be subtracted from each; therefore the remainder GC is equal to the remainder FD .

59 And, since AE is the same multiple of CF that EB is of GC , and GC is equal to DF , therefore AE is the same multiple of CF that EB is of FD .

60But, by hypothesis,

61 AE is the same multiple of CF that AB is of CD ; therefore EB is the same multiple of FD that AB is of CD .

62 That is, the remainder EB will be the same multiple of the remainder FD that the whole AB is of the whole CD .

63 Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

64 If two magnitudes be equimultiples of two magnitudes , and any magnitudes subtracted from them be equimultiples of the same , the remainders also are either equal to the same or equimultiples of them .

65 For let two magnitudes AB , CD be equimultiples of two magnitudes E , F , and let AG , CH subtracted from them be equimultiples of the same two E , F ; I say that the remainders also, GB , HD , are either equal to E , F or equimultiples of them.

66 For, first, let GB be equal to E ; I say that HD is also equal to F .

67 For let CK be made equal to F .

68 Since AG is the same multiple of E that CH is of F , while GB is equal to E and KC to F , therefore AB is the same multiple of E that KH is of F . [ V. 2 ]

69 But, by hypothesis, AB is the same multiple of E that CD is of F ; therefore KH is the same multiple of F that CD is of F .

70 Since then each of the magnitudes KH , CD is the same multiple of F , therefore KH is equal to CD .

71 Let CH be subtracted from each; therefore the remainder KC is equal to the remainder HD .

72 But F is equal to KC ; therefore HD is also equal to F .

73 Hence, if GB is equal to E , HD is also equal to F .

74 Similarly we can prove that, even if GB be a multiple of E , HD is also the same multiple of F .

75Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

76 Equal magnitudes have to the same the same ratio , as also has the same to equal magnitudes .

77 Let A , B be equal magnitudes and C any other, chance, magnitude; I say that each of the magnitudes A , B has the same ratio to C , and C has the same ratio to each of the magnitudes A , B .

78 For let equimultiples D , E of A , B be taken, and of C another, chance, multiple F .

79 Then, since D is the same multiple of A that E is of B , while A is equal to B , therefore D is equal to E .

80 But F is another, chance, magnitude.

81 If therefore D is in excess of F , E is also in excess of F , if equal to it, equal; and, if less, less.

82 And D , E are equimultiples of A , B , while F is another, chance, multiple of C ; therefore, as A is to C , so is B to C . [ V. Def. 5 ]

83 I say next that C also has the same ratio to each of the magnitudes A , B .

84 For, with the same construction, we can prove similarly that D is equal to E ; and F is some other magnitude.

85 If therefore F is in excess of D , it is also in excess of E , if equal, equal; and, if less, less.

86 And F is a multiple of C , while D , E are other, chance, equimultiples of A , B ; therefore, as C is to A , so is C to B . [ V. Def. 5 ]

87Therefore etc.

89 Of unequal magnitudes , the greater has to the same a greater ratio than the less has ; and the same has to the less a greater ratio than it has to the greater .

90 Let AB , C be unequal magnitudes, and let AB be greater; let D be another, chance, magnitude; I say that AB has to D a greater ratio than C has to D , and D has to C a greater ratio than it has to AB .

91 For, since AB is greater than C , let BE be made equal to C ; then the less of the magnitudes AE , EB , if multiplied, will sometime be greater than D . [ V. Def. 4 ]

92 [ Case I.]

93 First, let AE be less than EB ; let AE be multiplied, and let FG be a multiple of it which is greater than D ; then, whatever multiple FG is of AE , let GH be made the same multiple of EB and K of C ; and let L be taken double of D , M triple of it, and successive multiples increasing by one, until what is taken is a multiple of D and the first that is greater than K . Let it be taken, and let it be N which is quadruple of D and the first multiple of it that is greather than K .

94 Then, since K is less than N first, therefore K is not less than M .

95 And, since FG is the same multiple of AE that GH is of EB , therefore FG is the same multiple of AE that FH is of AB . [ V. 1 ]

96 But FG is the same multiple of AE that K is of C ; therefore FH is the same multiple of AB that K is of C ; therefore FH , K are equimultiples of AB , C .

97 Again, since GH is the same multiple of EB that K is of C , and EB is equal to C , therefore GH is equal to K .

98 But K is not less than M ; therefore neither is GH less than M .

99 And FG is greater than D ; therefore the whole FH is greater than D , M together.

100 But D , M together are equal to N , inasmuch as M is triple of D , and M , D together are quadruple of D , while N is also quadruple of D ; whence M , D together are equal to N .

101 But FH is greater than M , D ; therefore FH is in excess of N , while K is not in excess of N .

102 And FH , K are equimultiples of AB , C , while N is another, chance, multiple of D ; therefore AB has to D a greater ratio than C has to D . [ V. Def. 7 ]

103 I say next, that D also has to C a greater ratio than D has to AB .

104 For, with the same construction, we can prove similarly that N is in excess of K , while N is not in excess of FH .

105 And N is a multiple of D , while FH , K are other, chance, equimultiples of AB , C ; therefore D has to C a greater ratio than D has to AB . [ V. Def. 7 ]

106 [ Case 2.]

107 Again, let AE be greater than EB .

108 Then the less, EB , if multiplied, will sometime be greater than D . [ V. Def. 4 ]

109 Let it be multiplied, and let GH be a multiple of EB and greater than D ; and, whatever multiple GH is of EB , let FG be made the same multiple of AE , and K of C .

110 Then we can prove similarly that FH , K are equimultiples of AB , C ; and, similarly, let N be taken a multiple of D but the first that is greater than FG , so that FG is again not less than M .

111 But GH is greater than D ; therefore the whole FH is in excess of D , M , that is, of N .

112 Now K is not in excess of N , inasmuch as FG also, which is greater than GH , that is, than K , is not in excess of N .

113 And in the same manner, by following the above argument, we complete the demonstration.

114Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

115 Magnitudes which have the same ratio to the same are equal to one another ; and magnitudes to which the same has the same ratio are equal .

116 For let each of the magnitudes A , B have the same ratio to C ; I say that A is equal to B .

117 For, otherwise, each of the magnitudes A , B would not have had the same ratio to C ; [ V. 8 ] but it has; therefore A is equal to B .

118 Again, let C have the same ratio to each of the magnitudes A , B ; I say that A is equal to B .

119 For, otherwise, C would not have had the same ratio to each of the magnitudes A , B ; [ V. 8 ] but it has; therefore A is equal to B .

120Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

121 Of magnitudes which have a ratio to the same , that which has a greater ratio is greater ; and that to which the same has a greater ratio is less .

122 For let A have to C a greater ratio than B has to C ; I say that A is greater than B .

123 For, if not, A is either equal to B or less.

124 Now A is not equal to B ; for in that case each of the magnitudes A , B would have had the same ratio to C ; [ V. 7 ] but they have not; therefore A is not equal to B .

125 Nor again is A less than B ; for in that case A would have had to C a less ratio than B has to C ; [ V. 8 ] but it has not; therefore A is not less than B .

126 But it was proved not to be equal either; therefore A is greater than B .

127 Again, let C have to B a greater ratio than C has to A ; I say that B is less than A .

128For, if not, it is either equal or greater.

129 Now B is not equal to A ; for in that case C would have had the same ratio to each of the magnitudes A , B ; [ V. 7 ] but it has not; therefore A is not equal to B .

130 Nor again is B greater than A ; for in that case C would have had to B a less ratio than it has to A ; [ V. 8 ] but it has not; therefore B is not greater than A .

131 But it was proved that it is not equal either; therefore B is less than A .

132Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

133 Ratios which are the same with the same ratio are also the same with one another .

134 For, as A is to B , so let C be to D , and, as C is to D , so let E be to F ; I say that, as A is to B , so is E to F .

135 For of A , C , E let equimultiples G , H , K be taken, and of B , D , F other, chance, equimultiples L , M , N .

136 Then since, as A is to B , so is C to D , and of A , C equimultiples G , H have been taken, and of B , D other, chance, equimultiples L , M , therefore, if G is in excess of L , H is also in excess of M , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

137 Again, since, as C is to D , so is E to F , and of C , E equimultiples H , K have been taken, and of D , F other, chance, equimultiples M , N , therefore, if H is in excess of M , K is also in excess of N , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

138 But we saw that, if H was in excess of M , G was also in excess of L ; if equal, equal; and if less, less; so that, in addition, if G is in excess of L , K is also in excess of N , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

139 And G , K are equimultiples of A , E , while L , N are other, chance, equimultiples of B , F ; therefore, as A is to B , so is E to F .

140Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

141 If any number of magnitudes be proportional , as one of the antecedents is to one of the consequents , so will all the antecedents be to all the consequents .

142 Let any number of magnitudes A , B , C , D , E , F be proportional, so that, as A is to B , so is C to D and E to F ; I say that, as A is to B , so are A , C , E to B , D , F .

143 For of A , C , E let equimultiples G , H , K be taken, and of B , D , F other, chance, equimultiples L , M , N .

144 Then since, as A is to B , so is C to D , and E to F , and of A , C , E equimultiples G , H , K have been taken, and of B , D , F other, chance, equimultiples L , M , N , therefore, if G is in excess of L , H is also in excess of M , and K of N , if equal, equal, and if less, less; so that, in addition, if G is in excess of L , then G , H , K are in excess of L , M , N , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

145 Now G and G , H , K are equimultiples of A and A , C , E , since, if any number of magnitudes whatever are respectively equimultiples of any magnitudes equal in multitude, whatever multiple one of the magnitudes is of one, that multiple also will all be of all. [ V. 1 ]

146 For the same reason L and L , M , N are also equimultiples of B and B , D , F ; therefore, as A is to B , so are A , C , E to B , D , F . [ V. Def. 5 ]

147Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

148 If a first magnitude have to a second the same ratio as a third to a fourth , and the third have to the fourth a greater ratio than a fifth has to a sixth , the first will also have to the second a greater ratio than the fifth to the sixth .

149 For let a first magnitude A have to a second B the same ratio as a third C has to a fourth D , and let the third C have to the fourth D a greater ratio than a fifth E has to a sixth F ; I say that the first A will also have to the second B a greater ratio than the fifth E to the sixth F .

150 For, since there are some equimultiples of C , E , and of D , F other, chance, equimultiples, such that the multiple of C is in excess of the multiple of D , while the multiple of E is not in excess of the multiple of F , [ V. Def. 7 ] let them be taken, and let G , H be equimultiples of C , E , and K , L other, chance, equimultiples of D , F , so that G is in excess of K , but H is not in excess of L ; and, whatever multiple G is of C , let M be also that multiple of A , and, whatever multiple K is of D , let N be also that multiple of B .

151 Now, since, as A is to B , so is C to D , and of A , C equimultiples M , G have been taken, and of B , D other, chance, equimultiples N , K , therefore, if M is in excess of N , G is also in excess of K , if equal, equal, and if less, less. [ V. Def. 5 ]

152 But G is in excess of K ; therefore M is also in excess of N .

153 But H is not in excess of L ; and M , H are equimultiples of A , E , and N , L other, chance, equimultiples of B , F ; therefore A has to B a greater ratio than E has to F . [ V. Def. 7 ]

154Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

155 If a first magnitude have to a second the same ratio as a third has to a fourth , and the first be greater than the third , the second will also be greater than the fourth ; if equal , equal ; and if less , less .

156 For let a first magnitude A have the same ratio to a second B as a third C has to a fourth D ; and let A be greater than C ; I say that B is also greater than D .

157 For, since A is greater than C , and B is another, chance, magnitude, therefore A has to B a greater ratio than C has to B . [ V. 8 ]

158 But, as A is to B , so is C to D ; therefore C has also to D a greater ratio than C has to B . [ V. 13 ]

159 But that to which the same has a greater ratio is less; [ V. 10 ] therefore D is less than B ; so that B is greater than D .

160 Similarly we can prove that, if A be equal to C , B will also be equal to D ; and, if A be less than C , B will also be less than D .

161Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

162 Parts have the same ratio as the same multiples of them taken in corresponding order .

163 For let AB be the same multiple of C that DE is of F ; I say that, as C is to F , so is AB to DE .

164 For, since AB is the same multiple of C that DE is of F , as many magnitudes as there are in AB equal to C , so many are there also in DE equal to F .

165 Let AB be divided into the magnitudes AG , GH , HB equal to C , and DE into the magnitudes DK , KL , LE equal to F ; then the multitude of the magnitudes AG , GH , HB will be equal to the multitude of the magnitudes DK , KL , LE .

166 And, since AG . GH , HB are equal to one another, and DK , KL , LE are also equal to one another, therefore, as AG is to DK , so is GH to KL , and HB to LE . [ V. 7 ]

167 Therefore, as one of the antecedents is to one of the consequents, so will all the antecedents be to all the consequents; [ V. 12 ] therefore, as AG is to DK , so is AB to DE .

168 But AG is equal to C and DK to F ; therefore, as C is to F , so is AB to DE .

169Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

170 If four magnitudes be proportional , they will also be proportional alternately .

171 Let A , B , C , D be four proportional magnitudes, so that, as A is to B , so is C to D ; I say that they will also be so alternately, that is, as A is to C , so is B to D .

172 For of A , B let equimultiples E , F be taken, and of C , D other, chance, equimultiples G , H .

173 Then, since E is the same multiple of A that F is of B , and parts have the same ratio as the same multiples of them, [ V. 15 ] therefore, as A is to B , so is E to F .

174 But as A is to B , so is C to D ; therefore also, as C is to D , so is E to F . [ V. 11 ]

175 Again, since G , H are equimultiples of C , D , therefore, as C is to D , so is G to H . [ V. 15 ]

176 But, as C is to D , so is E to F ; therefore also, as E is to F , so is G to H . [ V. 11 ]

177 But, if four magnitudes be proportional, and the first be greater than the third, the second will also be greater than the fourth; if equal, equal; and if less, less. [ V. 14 ]

178 Therefore, if E is in excess of G , F is also in excess of H , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

179 Now E , F are equimultiples of A , B , and G , H other, chance, equimultiples of C , D ; therefore, as A is to C , so is B to D . [ V. Def. 5 ]

180 Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

181 If magnitudes be proportional componendo , they will also be proportional separando .

182 Let AB , BE , CD , DF be magnitudes proportional componendo , so that, as AB is to BE , so is CD to DF ; I say that they will also be proportional separando , that is, as AE is to EB , so is CF to DF .

183 For of AE , EB , CF , FD let equimultiples GH , HK , LM , MN be taken, and of EB , FD other, chance, equimultiples, KO , NP .

184 Then, since GH is the same multiple of AE that HK is of EB , therefore GH is the same multiple of AE that GK is of AB . [ V. 1 ]

185 But GH is the same multiple of AE that LM is of CF ; therefore GK is the same multiple of AB that LM is of CF .

186 Again, since LM is the same multiple of CF that MN is of FD , therefore LM is the same multiple of CF that LN is of CD . [ V. 1 ]

187 But LM was the same multiple of CF that GK is of AB ; therefore GK is the same multiple of AB that LN is of CD .

188 Therefore GK , LN are equimultiples of AB , CD .

189 Again, since HK is the same multiple of EB that MN is of FD , and KO is also the same multiple of EB that NP is of FD , therefore the sum HO is also the same multiple of EB that MP is of FD . [ V. 2 ]

190 And, since, as AB is to BE , so is CD to DF , and of AB , CD equimultiples GK , LN have been taken, and of EB , FD equimultiples HO , MP , therefore, if GK is in excess of HO , LN is also in excess of MP , if equal, equal, and if less, less.

191 Let GK be in excess of HO ; then, if HK be subtracted from each, GH is also in excess of KO .

192 But we saw that, if GK was in excess of HO , LN was also in excess of MP ; therefore LN is also in excess of MP , and, if MN be subtracted from each, LM is also in excess of NP ; so that, if GH is in excess of KO , LM is also in excess of NP .

193 Similarly we can prove that, if GH be equal to KO , LM will also be equal to NP , and if less, less.

194 And GH , LM are equimultiples of AE , CF , while KO , NP are other, chance, equimultiples of EB , FD ; therefore, as AE is to EB , so is CF to FD .

195Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

196 If magnitudes be proportional separando , they will also be proportional componendo .

197 Let AE , EB , CF , FD be magnitudes proportional separando , so that, as AE is to EB , so is CF to FD ; I say that they will also be proportional componendo , that is, as AB is to BE , so is CD to FD .

198 For, if CD be not to DF as AB to BE , then, as AB is to BE , so will CD be either to some magnitude less than DF or to a greater.

199 First, let it be in that ratio to a less magnitude DG .

200 Then, since, as AB is to BE , so is CD to DG , they are magnitudes proportional componendo ; so that they will also be proportional separando . [ V. 17 ]

201 Therefore, as AE is to EB , so is CG to GD .

202 But also, by hypothesis, as AE is to EB , so is CF to FD .

203 Therefore also, as CG is to GD , so is CF to FD . [ V. 11 ]

204 But the first CG is greater than the third CF ; therefore the second GD is also greater than the fourth FD . [ V. 14 ]

205But it is also less: which is impossible.

206 Therefore, as AB is to BE , so is not CD to a less magnitude than FD .

207 Similarly we can prove that neither is it in that ratio to a greater; it is therefore in that ratio to FD itself.

208Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

209 If, as a whole is to a whole, so is a part subtracted to a part subtracted , the remainder will also be to the remainder as whole to whole .

210 For, as the whole AB is to the whole CD , so let the part AE subtracted be to the part CF subtracted; I say that the remainder EB will also be to the remainder FD as the whole AB to the whole CD .

211 For since, as AB is to CD , so is AE to CF , alternately also, as BA is to AE , so is DC to CF . [ V. 16 ]

212 And, since the magnitudes are proportional componendo , they will also be proportional separando , [ V. 17 ] that is, as BE is to EA , so is DF to CF , and, alternately, as BE is to DF , so is EA to FC . [ V. 16 ]

213 But, as AE is to CF , so by hypothesis is the whole AB to the whole CD .

214 Therefore also the remainder EB will be to the remainder FD as the whole AB is to the whole CD . [ V. 11 ]

215Therefore etc. [

217 If there be three magnitudes , and others equal to them in multitude , which taken two and two are in the same ratio , and if ex aequali the first be greater than the third , the fourth will also be greater than the sixth ; if equal , equal ; and , if less , less .

218 Let there be three magnitudes A , B , C , and others D , E , F equal to them in multitude, which taken two and two are in the same ratio, so that, as A is to B , so is D to E , and as B is to C , so is E to F ; and let A be greater than C ex aequali ; I say that D will also be greater than F ; if A is equal to C , equal; and, if less, less.

219 For, since A is greater than C , and B is some other magnitude, and the greater has to the same a greater ratio than the less has, [ V. 8 ] therefore A has to B a greater ratio than C has to B .

220 But, as A is to B , so is D to E , and, as C is to B , inversely, so is F to E ; therefore D has also to E a greater ratio than F has to E . [ V. 13 ]

221 But, of magnitudes which have a ratio to the same, that which has a greater ratio is greater; [ V. 10 ] therefore D is greater than F .

222 Similarly we can prove that, if A be equal to C , D will also be equal to F ; and if less, less.

223Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

224 If there be three magnitudes , and others equal to them in multitude , which taken two and two together are in the same ratio , and the proportion of them be perturbed , then , if ex aequali the first magnitude is greater than the third , the fourth will also be greater than the sixth; if equal , equal; and if less , less .

225 Let there be three magnitudes A , B , C , and others D , E , F equal to them in multitude, which taken two and two are in the same ratio, and let the proportion of them be perturbed, so that, as A is to B , so is E to F , and, as B is to C , so is D to E , and let A be greater than C ex aequali ; I say that D will also be greater than F ; if A is equal to C , equal; and if less, less.

226 For, since A is greater than C , and B is some other magnitude, therefore A has to B a greater ratio than C has to B . [ V. 8 ]

227 But, as A is to B , so is E to F , and, as C is to B , inversely, so is E to D . Therefore also E has to F a greater ratio than E has to D . [ V. 13 ]

228 But that to which the same has a greater ratio is less; [ V. 10 ] therefore F is less than D ; therefore D is greater than F .

229 Similarly we can prove that, if A be equal to C , D will also be equal to F ; and if less, less.

230Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

231 If there be any number of magnitudes whatever , and others equal to them in multitude , which taken two and two together are in the same ratio , they will also be in the same ratio ex aequali.

232 Let there be any number of magnitudes A , B , C , and others D , E , F equal to them in multitude, which taken two and two together are in the same ratio, so that, as A is to B , so is D to E , and, as B is to C , so is E to F ; I say that they will also be in the same ratio ex aequali , that is, as A is to C , so is D to F .

233 For of A , D let equimultiples G , H be taken, and of B , E other, chance, equimultiples K , L ; and, further, of C , F other, chance, equimultiples M , N .

234 Then, since, as A is to B , so is D to E , and of A , D equimultiples G , H have been taken, and of B , E other, chance, equimultiples K , L , therefore, as G is to K , so is H to L . [ V. 4 ]

235 For the same reason also, as K is to M , so is L to N .

236 Since, then, there are three magnitudes G , K , M , and others H , L , N equal to them in multitude, which taken two and two together are in the same ratio, therefore, ex aequali , if G is in excess of M , H is also in excess of N ; if equal, equal; and if less, less. [ V. 20 ]

237 And G , H are equimultiples of A , D , and M , N other, chance, equimultiples of C , F .

238 Therefore, as A is to C , so is D to F . [ V. Def. 5 ]

239Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

240 If there be three magnitudes , and others equal to them in multitude , which taken two and two together are in the same ratio , and the proportion of them be perturbed , they will also be in the same ratio ex aequali .

241 Let there be three magnitudes A , B , C , and others equal to them in multitude, which, taken two and two together, are in the same proportion, namely D , E , F ; and let the proportion of them be perturbed, so that, as A is to B , so is E to F , and, as B is to C , so is D to E ; I say that, as A is to C , so is D to F .

242 Of A , B , D let equimultiples G , H , K be taken, and of C , E , F other, chance, equimultiples L , M , N .

243 Then, since G , H are equimultiples of A , B , and parts have the same ratio as the same multiples of them, [ V. 15 ] therefore, as A is to B , so is G to H .

244 For the same reason also, as E is to F , so is M to N . And, as A is to B , so is E to F ; therefore also, as G is to H , so is M to N . [ V. 11 ]

245 Next, since, as B is to C , so is D to E , alternately, also, as B is to D , so is C to E . [ V. 16 ]

246 And, since H , K are equimultiples of B , D , and parts have the same ratio as their equimultiples, therefore, as B is to D , so is H to K . [ V. 15 ]

247 But, as B is to D , so is C to E ; therefore also, as H is to K , so is C to E . [ V. 11 ]

248 Again, since L , M are equimultiples of C , E , therefore, as C is to E , so is L to M . [ V. 15 ]

249 But, as C is to E , so is H to K ; therefore also, as H is to K , so is L to M , [ V. 11 ] and, alternately, as H is to L , so is K to M . [ V. 16 ]

250 But it was also proved that, as G is to H , so is M to N .

251 Since, then, there are three magnitudes G , H , L , and others equal to them in multitude K , M , N , which taken two and two together are in the same ratio, and the proportion of them is perturbed, therefore, ex aequali , if G is in excess of L , K is also in excess of N ; if equal, equal; and if less, less. [ V. 21 ]

252 And G , K are equimultiples of A , D , and L , N of C , F .

253 Therefore, as A is to C , so is D to F .

254Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

255 If a first magnitude have to a second the same ratio as a third has to a fourth , and also a fifth have to the second the same ratio as a sixth to the fourth , the first and fifth added together will have to the second the same ratio as the third and sixth have to the fourth .

256 Let a first magnitude AB have to a second C the same ratio as a third DE has to a fourth F ; and let also a fifth BG have to the second C the same ratio as a sixth EH has to the fourth F ; I say that the first and fifth added together, AG , will have to the second C the same ratio as the third and sixth, DH , has to the fourth F .

257 For since, as BG is to C , so is EH to F , inversely, as C is to BG , so is F to EH .

258 Since, then, as AB is to C , so is DE to F , and, as C is to BG , so is F to EH , therefore, ex aequali , as AB is to BG , so is DE to EH . [ V. 22 ]

259 And, since the magnitudes are proportional separando , they will also be proportional componendo ; [ V. 18 ] therefore, as AG is to GB , so is DH to HE .

260 But also, as BG is to C , so is EH to F ; therefore, ex aequali , as AG is to C , so is DH to F . [ V. 22 ]

261Therefore etc. Q. E. D.

262 If four magnitudes be proportional , the greatest and the least are greater than the remaining two .

263 Let the four magnitudes AB , CD , E , F be proportional so that, as AB is to CD , so is E to F , and let AB be the greatest of them and F the least; I say that AB , F are greater than CD , E .

264 For let AG be made equal to E , and CH equal to F .

265 Since, as AB is to CD , so is E to F , and E is equal to AG , and F to CH , therefore, as AB is to CD , so is AG to CH .

266 And since, as the whole AB is to the whole CD , so is the part AG subtracted to the part CH subtracted, the remainder GB will also be to the remainder HD as the whole AB is to the whole CD . [ V. 19 ]

267 But AB is greater than CD ; therefore GB is also greater than HD .

268 And, since AG is equal to E , and CH to F , therefore AG , F are equal to CH , E .

269 And if, GB , HD being unequal, and GB greater, AG , F be added to GB and CH , E be added to HD , it follows that AB , F are greater than CD , E .

270Therefore etc. Q. E. D.