THE ELEMENTS. BOOK V
389
_
we have ma : mb — no ; nd, (H)
whence (14), according as ma > = < no, mb > = < nd ;
therefore (Def. 5) a : c = h : d.
17. If a:b = c:d,
then, separando, {a — b) : b = (c — d) : d.
Take met, mb, me, md equimultiples of all four magnitudes,
and nb, nd other equimultiples of b, d. It follows (2) that
(m + n) b, (m + n)d are also equimultiples of b, d.
Therefore, since a:h = c :d,
ma > = <{m + n)b according as me > = <(m + n) d. (Def. 5)
Subtracting mb from both sides of the former relation and
md from both sides of the latter, we have (5)
m (a — b) > = < nb according as m (c — d) > = < nd.
Therefore (Def. 5) a — b:b = c — d:d.
(I have here abbreviated Euclid a little, without altering the
substance.)
18. If a : b = c : d,
then, componendo, {a + b):b = (c + d):d.
Proved by reductio ad absurdum. Euclid assumes that
a + h:b = (c + d): (d±x), if that is possible. (This implies
that to any three given magnitudes, two of which at least
are of the same kind, there exists a fourth proportional, an
assumption which is not strictly legitimate until the fact has
been proved by construction.)
Therefore, separando (17), a\b — (c + x) : (d±x),
whence (11), (c + x) : {d ± x) = c : d, which relations are im
possible, by 14.
19. If a:b = c:d,
then (a — c) : (b — d) = a:b.
Alternately (16),
a:c = b:d, whence (a — c):c = (b—d):d (17).
Alternately again, (a — c):{b — d) = c:d (16) ;
whence (11) (a — c):{b — d) = a:b.