| Bugz
Podder |
triangle ABC has circumradius 1 any point M on the circumcircle, MA*MB*MC< =2 show it is equilateral |
||
| Bilen
Ahmet |
this can probably be done by using the expression for a general point on a circumcircle, and multiplying the generalised expressions for MA,MB,MC, perhaps using vectors. To prove it, you should end with a resultant equation that shows for all other triangles the product is greater than 2. You may also be able to use RAA. |
||
| David
Loeffler |
> To prove it, you should end with a resultant equation that shows for all other triangles the product is greater than 2. I don't think it can be that simple, since if M = A, then the expression is zero, and thus < 2. The question is whether or not there is some point on the circumcircle for which MA*MB*MC > 2. You can attack this either by guessing a suitable point and showing that if A is not equilateral it has the required property, or by finding explicitly the point at which MA*MB*MC is maximised. David |
||
| Rachel
Burns |
You could try using the fact that if M lies between A and C say on the circumcentre that MB= MA+MC ... |
||
| David
Loeffler |
I think if you assume and take M to be the midpoint of the arc between B and C on the opposite side from A, then if ABC is not equilateral, then it all works. In fact, if I am not mistaken in my calculations, for this M we have . Since , we have , so ; thus it suffices to show that . This looks like it ought to be easy, but I haven't found a sensible proof. If we use the formula for cosine in terms of the side lengths we must show Expanding everything out we must show We know that and so it suffices to show that which is just and is consequently true. So we are done. (Phew!) I'll leave you the fun of checking that MA * MB * MC is never > 2 for an equilateral triangle (use Ptolemy's theorem). David |
||
| David
Loeffler |
Rachel, what you say is only true for an equilateral triangle (for a general triangle the corresponding statement is that a MA + c MC = b MB, which is a restatement of Ptolemy's theorem). David |
||
| Bugz
Podder |
A brute force solution, although solves the problem, is uninteresting... but then again, i do not see any elegant way of attacking this problem |
||
| David
Loeffler |
Are you criticising my solution? ![]() No, I agree, it is not particularly inspiring. If I get round to it I might have another think and see if I can work out the real reason why it is true - finding the point Mmax which maximises the product in the statement of the problem could be illuminating. David |
||
| Bugz
Podder |
at least you got a solution ;) |