Difference between revisions of "1966 IMO Problems/Problem 2"
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
<math>(a + b) \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} = a \tan \alpha + b \tan \beta</math>. | <math>(a + b) \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} = a \tan \alpha + b \tan \beta</math>. | ||
− | From <math>\alpha < \beta</math> it follows that <math>a < b</math>. So, | + | From <math>\alpha < \frac{\pi}{2} \le \beta</math> it follows that <math>a < b</math>. So, |
<math>b \tan \beta = (a + b) \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} - a \tan \alpha > | <math>b \tan \beta = (a + b) \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} - a \tan \alpha > | ||
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
{1 - \tan^2 \frac{\alpha}{2}} > 0</math> | {1 - \tan^2 \frac{\alpha}{2}} > 0</math> | ||
− | because the numerator is <math>> 0</math> and the denominator is also <math>> 0</math> | + | because the numerator is <math>> 0</math> (because <math>x^2 + x + 1 > 0</math>), and the |
− | (because <math>\alpha < \frac{\pi}{2}</math> so <math>\tan \frac{\alpha}{2} < 1</math>). | + | denominator is also <math>> 0</math> (because <math>\alpha < \frac{\pi}{2}</math> so |
+ | <math>\tan \frac{\alpha}{2} < 1</math>). | ||
It follows that <math>\tan \beta > 0</math>, so it can not be that | It follows that <math>\tan \beta > 0</math>, so it can not be that | ||
Line 55: | Line 56: | ||
implies <math>\alpha = \beta</math>. | implies <math>\alpha = \beta</math>. | ||
+ | Replace <math>a = \sin \alpha \cdot 2R</math> and <math>b = \sin \beta \cdot 2R</math> | ||
+ | (in fact, we don't care that <math>R</math> is the radius of the circumscribed | ||
+ | circle), and simplify by <math>2R</math>. We get | ||
+ | <math>(\sin \alpha + \sin \beta) \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} = | ||
+ | \sin \alpha \tan \alpha + \sin \beta \tan \beta</math>. | ||
+ | This becomes | ||
+ | <math>(\sin \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2}) \cdot | ||
+ | \cos \frac{\alpha - \beta}{2} = | ||
+ | \frac{1}{2}(\sin \alpha \tan \alpha + \sin \beta \tan \beta)</math> | ||
+ | We will show that the function <math>f(x) = \tan x \sin x</math> is convex on | ||
+ | the interval <math>(0, \frac{\pi}{2})</math>. Indeed, the first derivative is | ||
+ | <math>f'(x) = \frac{\sin x}{\cos^2 x} + \sin x</math>, and the second derivative | ||
+ | is <math>f''(x) = \frac{\cos^4 x - \cos ^2 x + 2}{\cos^3 x}</math>. | ||
+ | We have <math>f''(x) > 0</math> on <math>(0, \frac{\pi}{2})</math> since the numerator | ||
+ | is <math>> 0</math> because <math>Y^2 - Y + 1 >0</math>, and the denominator is <math>> 0</math> on | ||
+ | the interval <math>(0, \frac{\pi}{2})</math>. It follows that | ||
+ | <math>f(x) = \tan x \sin x</math> is convex on the interval <math>(0, \frac{\pi}{2})</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Using the convexity we have | ||
+ | <math>f \left( \frac{x + y}{2} \right) \le \frac{1}{2} (f(x) + f(y))</math>. In | ||
+ | our case, we have | ||
+ | |||
+ | <math>\frac{1}{2}(\sin \alpha \tan \alpha + \sin \beta \tan \beta) = | ||
+ | (\sin \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2} \tan \frac{\alpha + \beta}{2}) \cdot | ||
+ | \cos \frac{\alpha - \beta}{2} \le | ||
+ | \frac{1}{2}(\sin \alpha \tan \alpha + \sin \beta \tan \beta) \cdot | ||
+ | \cos \frac{\alpha - \beta}{2}</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | We can simplify by <math>\sin \alpha \tan \alpha + \sin \beta \tan \beta</math> | ||
+ | because it is positive (because both <math>\alpha, \beta</math> are acute!), | ||
+ | and we get <math>1 \le \cos \frac{\alpha - \beta}{2}</math>. This is possible | ||
+ | only when <math>\cos \frac{\alpha - \beta}{2} = 1</math>, i.e. <math>\alpha = \beta</math>. | ||
(Solution by pf02, September 2024) | (Solution by pf02, September 2024) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
{{IMO box|year=1966|num-b=1|num-a=3}} | {{IMO box|year=1966|num-b=1|num-a=3}} |
Revision as of 02:22, 29 September 2024
Let ,
, and
be the lengths of the sides of a triangle, and
respectively, the angles opposite these sides. Prove that if
the triangle is isosceles.
Solution
We'll prove that the triangle is isosceles with .
We'll prove that
. Assume by way of contradiction WLOG that
.
First notice that as
then and the identity
our equation becomes:
Using the identity
and inserting this into the above equation we get:
Now, since
and the definitions of
being part of the definition of a triangle,
.
Now,
(as
and the angles are positive),
, and furthermore,
. By all the above,
Which contradicts our assumption, thus
. By the symmetry of the condition, using the same arguments,
. Hence
.
Solution 2
First, we'll prove that both and
are acute.
At least one of them has to be acute because these are angles
of a triangle. We can assume that
is acute. We want
to show that
is acute as well. For a proof by
contradiction, assume
.
From the hypothesis, it follows that
.
From it follows that
. So,
because the numerator is (because
), and the
denominator is also
(because
so
).
It follows that , so it can not be that
.
Now, we will prove that
implies
.
Replace and
(in fact, we don't care that
is the radius of the circumscribed
circle), and simplify by
. We get
.
This becomes
We will show that the function is convex on
the interval
. Indeed, the first derivative is
, and the second derivative
is
.
We have on
since the numerator
is
because
, and the denominator is
on
the interval
. It follows that
is convex on the interval
.
Using the convexity we have
. In
our case, we have
.
We can simplify by
because it is positive (because both
are acute!),
and we get
. This is possible
only when
, i.e.
.
(Solution by pf02, September 2024)
See Also
1966 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 1 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 3 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |