2011 USAMO Problems/Problem 3: Difference between revisions
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
If <math>r-t=s-t=0</math>, then <math>P</math> must be similar to <math>P'</math> and the conclusion is obvious. | If <math>r-t=s-t=0</math>, then <math>P</math> must be similar to <math>P'</math> and the conclusion is obvious. | ||
Otherwise, since <math>a'-b'+d'-e'\ne0</math> and <math>b'-c'+e'-f'\ne0</math>, we must have <math>r-t\ne0</math> and <math>s-t\ne0</math>. Now let <math>x=\frac{a'+d'}{2}</math>, <math>y=\frac{c'+f'}{2}</math>, <math>z=\frac{e'+b'}{2}</math> be the feet of the altitudes in <math>\triangle{A'C'E'}</math>; by the non-parallel condition in <math>P'</math>, <math>x,y,z</math> are pairwise distinct. But <math>\frac{z-x}{z-y}=\frac{s-t}{r-t}\in\mathbb{R}</math>, whence <math>x,y,z</math> are three distinct collinear points | Otherwise, since <math>a'-b'+d'-e'\ne0</math> and <math>b'-c'+e'-f'\ne0</math>, we must have <math>r-t\ne0</math> and <math>s-t\ne0</math>. Now let <math>x=\frac{a'+d'}{2}</math>, <math>y=\frac{c'+f'}{2}</math>, <math>z=\frac{e'+b'}{2}</math> be the feet of the altitudes in <math>\triangle{A'C'E'}</math>; by the non-parallel condition in <math>P'</math>, <math>x,y,z</math> are pairwise distinct. But <math>\frac{z-x}{z-y}=\frac{s-t}{r-t}\in\mathbb{R}</math>, whence <math>x,y,z</math> are three distinct collinear points, which is clearly impossible. (The points can only be collinear when <math>\triangle{A'C'E'}</math> is a right triangle, but in this case two of <math>x,y,z</math> must coincide.) | ||
Alternatively (for the previous paragraph), WLOG assume that <math>(A'C'E')</math> is the unit circle, and use the fact that <math>b'=a'+c'-\frac{a'c'}{e'}</math>, etc. | Alternatively (for the previous paragraph), WLOG assume that <math>(A'C'E')</math> is the unit circle, and use the fact that <math>b'=a'+c'-\frac{a'c'}{e'}</math>, etc. to get simple expressions for <math>a'-b'+d'-e'</math> and <math>b'-c'+e'-f'</math>. | ||
===Solution 3=== | ===Solution 3=== | ||
Revision as of 21:17, 29 October 2012
In hexagon
, which is nonconvex but not self-intersecting, no pair of opposite sides are parallel. The internal angles satisfy
,
, and
. Furthermore
,
, and
. Prove that diagonals
,
, and
are concurrent.
Solutions
Solution 1
Let
,
, and
,
,
,
,
intersect
at
,
intersect
at
, and
intersect
at
. Define the vectors:
Clearly,
.
Note that
. By sliding the vectors
and
to the vectors
and
respectively, then
. As
is isosceles with
, the base angles are both
. Thus,
. Similarly,
and
.
Next we will find the angles between
,
, and
. As
, the angle between the vectors
and
is
. Similarly, the angle between
and
is
, and the angle between
and
is
. Thus, the angle between
and
is
, or just
in the other direction if we take it modulo
. Similarly, the angle between
and
is
, and the angle between
and
is
.
And since
, we can arrange the three vectors to form a triangle, so the triangle with sides of lengths
,
, and
has opposite angles of
,
, and
, respectively. So by the law of sines:
and the triangle with sides of length
,
, and
has corrosponding angles of
,
, and
. But then triangles
,
, and
. So
,
, and
, and
,
, and
are the reflections of the vertices of triangle
about the sides. So
,
, and
concur at the orthocenter of triangle
.
Solution 2
We work in the complex plane, where lowercase letters denote point affixes. Let
denote hexagon
. Since
, the condition
is equivalent to
.
Construct a "phantom hexagon"
as follows: let
be a triangle with
,
, and
(this is possible since
by the angle conditions), and reflect
over its sides to get points
, respectively. By rotation and reflection if necessary, we assume
and
have the same orientation (clockwise or counterclockwise), i.e.
. It's easy to verify that
for
and opposite sides of
have equal lengths. As the corresponding sides of
and
must then be parallel, there exist positive reals
such that
,
, and
. But then
, etc., so the non-parallel condition "transfers" directly from
to
and
If
, then
must be similar to
and the conclusion is obvious.
Otherwise, since
and
, we must have
and
. Now let
,
,
be the feet of the altitudes in
; by the non-parallel condition in
,
are pairwise distinct. But
, whence
are three distinct collinear points, which is clearly impossible. (The points can only be collinear when
is a right triangle, but in this case two of
must coincide.)
Alternatively (for the previous paragraph), WLOG assume that
is the unit circle, and use the fact that
, etc. to get simple expressions for
and
.
Solution 3
We work in the complex plane to give (essentially) a complete characterization when the parallel condition is relaxed.
WLOG assume
are on the unit circle. It suffices to show that
uniquely determine
, since we know that if we let
be the reflection of
over
,
be the reflection of
over
, and
be the reflection of
over
, then
satisfies the problem conditions. (*)
It's easy to see with the given conditions that
Note that
so plugging into the third equation we have
Simplifying, this becomes
Of course, we can also "conjugate" this equation -- a nice way to do this is to note that if
then
whence
If
, then eliminating
, we get
The first case corresponds to (*) (since
uniquely determine
and
), the second corresponds to
(or equivalently, since
,
), and by symmetry, the third corresponds to
.
Otherwise, if
, then we easily find
from the first of the two equations in
(we actually don't need this, but it tells us that the locus of working
is a line through the origin). It's easy to compute
and
, so
, and we're done.
Comment. It appears that taking
the unit circle is nicer than, say
or
the unit circle (which may not even be reasonably tractable).
See Also
| 2011 USAMO (Problems • Resources) | ||
| Preceded by Problem 2 |
Followed by Problem 4 | |
| 1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | ||
| All USAMO Problems and Solutions | ||