Difference between revisions of "1972 IMO Problems/Problem 2"
Line 53: | Line 53: | ||
Before giving the missing details, let us remember that a quadrilateral | Before giving the missing details, let us remember that a quadrilateral | ||
<math>ABCD</math> is inscribable if and only if a pair of opposing angles adds | <math>ABCD</math> is inscribable if and only if a pair of opposing angles adds | ||
− | up to <math>\pi</math> | + | up to <math>\pi,</math> in other words <math>\angle A + \angle C = \pi,</math> or equivalently, |
<math>\angle B + \angle D = \pi</math>. In particular, any isosceles trapezoid is | <math>\angle B + \angle D = \pi</math>. In particular, any isosceles trapezoid is | ||
inscribable. | inscribable. | ||
Line 74: | Line 74: | ||
Let us now make precise what it means that <math>U</math> should be close enough | Let us now make precise what it means that <math>U</math> should be close enough | ||
to <math>D</math>, or <math>V</math> should be close enough to <math>F</math>, so that we can find <math>XY</math>, | to <math>D</math>, or <math>V</math> should be close enough to <math>F</math>, so that we can find <math>XY</math>, | ||
− | so that <math> | + | so that <math>DUX</math> is inscribable. |
+ | One way of constructing the circle <math>DUXY</math> is the following: Let us consider | ||
+ | the median of <math>DF</math>. If <math>\angle D</math> is acute, it intersects <math>DA</math> someplace | ||
+ | on the same side as <math>A</math> of <math>DA</math> (relative to <math>D</math>). Let us pick <math>U</math> between | ||
+ | <math>D</math> and this point of intersection (this is the first condition for <math>U</math> | ||
+ | being close enough to <math>D</math>). Note that <math>VU</math> is of fixed slope and length | ||
+ | because <math>UVEA</math> has to be an isosceles trapezoid. We pick <math>Y</math> between <math>D</math> | ||
+ | and <math>F</math>, Then the median of <math>DY</math> is on the same side as <math>D</math> of the median | ||
+ | of <math>DF</math>. The center <math>O</math> of the circle we are looking for is at the | ||
+ | intersection of the median to <math>DY</math> and the median to <math>DU</math>. The circle | ||
+ | with this center <math>O</math> and radius <math>OD = OU = OY</math> intersects <math>UV</math> in a point | ||
+ | <math>X</math>. We need to make sure that <math>X</math> is between <math>U</math> and <math>V</math>. For this, | ||
+ | we need to know that <math>O</math> is on the same side of the median to <math>UV</math> as <math>D</math> | ||
+ | and <math>U</math>. If we denote <math>Z</math> the intersection of the median to <math>UV</math> with <math>UD</math>, | ||
+ | we need to know that <math>UZ > UD/2</math>. We have | ||
+ | <math>UZ = (UV/2) \cdot (1/\cos (\angle DUV))</math>, so the condition becomes | ||
+ | <math>UV/(2 /\cos (\angle DUV)) > UD/2</math>. Since <math>UV</math> and <math>\angle DUV</math> are of | ||
+ | specified sizes, this gives a second condition for <math>UD</math> being small enough. | ||
+ | In the discussion above, we assumed <math>\angle D</math> acute and implicitly, we | ||
+ | assumed <math>\angle DUV</math> acute. The cases when either of these angles is not | ||
+ | acute is less restrictive, and the arguments for choosing <math>U</math>, and then | ||
+ | <math>Y</math> are similar (and easier). We will skip the discussion for these cases. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Solution 2== | ||
Revision as of 02:05, 27 March 2025
Contents
Problem
Prove that if , every quadrilateral that can be inscribed in a circle can be dissected into
quadrilaterals each of which is inscribable in a circle.
Solution
Our initial quadrilateral will be .
For , we do this:
Take with
sufficiently close to
respectively. Take
such that
is an isosceles trapezoid, with
close enough to
(or
close enough to
) that we can find a circle passing through
(or
) which cuts the segments
in
. Our four cyclic quadrilaterals are
.
For we do the exact same thing as above, but now, since we have an isosceles trapezoid, we can add as many trapezoids as we want by dissecting the one trapezoid with lines parallel to its bases.
The above solution was posted and copyrighted by grobber. The original thread for this problem can be found here: [1]
Remarks (added by pf02, March 2025)
The construction described in the solution above is correct (in the sense that it describes a legitimate way of dissecting an inscribable quadrilateral into four inscribable quadrilaterals). However, the solution is incomplete and sloppily written.
Below I will discuss and complete the solution given above.
Then, I will give a second solution. And finally, I will
discuss the cases when .
Discussion and completion of the above solution
The first issue is the fact that a construction is described, but there is no proof, not even a hint, why the the quadrilaterals are inscribable. This is not obvious, and it needs a proof. I will give the proof below.
The second issue is the vagueness of "close enough" used twice
in the proof. The first time it is used, " sufficiently
close to
respectively" is not needed (indeed, and segment
parallel to
would do), so there is no need to make
this more precise. The second time it is used, namely "
close enough to
(or
close enough to
) that we can
find a circle passing through
(or
)" is indeed
needed, and it is not at all clear what "close enough" should
be, or that this is at all possible. I will come back to this
shortly.
The third issue is poor wording. We don't need to "add as many trapezoids as we want". We want to dissect the one isosceles trapezoid into as many isosceles trapezoids as we want by lines parallel to its bases.
Before giving the missing details, let us remember that a quadrilateral
is inscribable if and only if a pair of opposing angles adds
up to
in other words
or equivalently,
. In particular, any isosceles trapezoid is
inscribable.
Now let us show that the four quadrilaterals are inscribable. It is easy
to see that the first one, is inscribable. Indeed,
. We know that
because
of parallelism, so
. The second one,
is an isosceles trapezoid by the choice of
, so it is inscribable.
The third one,
is inscribable by construction. It remains to be
shown that
is inscribable.
We have . This shows that
is inscribable.
Note that as suggested by the solution, we could have chosen so
that
is inscribable, in which case a similar argument would have
shown that
is inscribable as well.
Let us now make precise what it means that should be close enough
to
, or
should be close enough to
, so that we can find
,
so that
is inscribable.
One way of constructing the circle is the following: Let us consider
the median of
. If
is acute, it intersects
someplace
on the same side as
of
(relative to
). Let us pick
between
and this point of intersection (this is the first condition for
being close enough to
). Note that
is of fixed slope and length
because
has to be an isosceles trapezoid. We pick
between
and
, Then the median of
is on the same side as
of the median
of
. The center
of the circle we are looking for is at the
intersection of the median to
and the median to
. The circle
with this center
and radius
intersects
in a point
. We need to make sure that
is between
and
. For this,
we need to know that
is on the same side of the median to
as
and
. If we denote
the intersection of the median to
with
,
we need to know that
. We have
, so the condition becomes
. Since
and
are of
specified sizes, this gives a second condition for
being small enough.
In the discussion above, we assumed acute and implicitly, we
assumed
acute. The cases when either of these angles is not
acute is less restrictive, and the arguments for choosing
, and then
are similar (and easier). We will skip the discussion for these cases.
Solution 2
TO BE CONTINUED. SAVING MID WAY, SO I DON'T LOOSE WORK DONE SO FAR.
See Also
1972 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 1 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 3 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |