Difference between revisions of "2019 USAJMO Problems/Problem 4"
Kevinmathz (talk | contribs) (Created page with "<math>(*)</math> Let <math>ABC</math> be a triangle with <math>\angle ABC</math> obtuse. The [i]<math>A</math>-excircle[/i] is a circle in the exterior of <math>\triangle ABC<...") |
Kevinmathz (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<math>(*)</math> Let <math>ABC</math> be a triangle with <math>\angle ABC</math> obtuse. The [i]<math>A</math>-excircle[/i] is a circle in the exterior of <math>\triangle ABC</math> that is tangent to side <math>\overline{BC}</math> of the triangle and tangent to the extensions of the other two sides. Let <math>E</math>, <math>F</math> be the feet of the altitudes from <math>B</math> and <math>C</math> to lines <math>AC</math> and <math>AB</math>, respectively. Can line <math>EF</math> be tangent to the <math>A</math>-excircle? | <math>(*)</math> Let <math>ABC</math> be a triangle with <math>\angle ABC</math> obtuse. The [i]<math>A</math>-excircle[/i] is a circle in the exterior of <math>\triangle ABC</math> that is tangent to side <math>\overline{BC}</math> of the triangle and tangent to the extensions of the other two sides. Let <math>E</math>, <math>F</math> be the feet of the altitudes from <math>B</math> and <math>C</math> to lines <math>AC</math> and <math>AB</math>, respectively. Can line <math>EF</math> be tangent to the <math>A</math>-excircle? | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Solution== | ||
+ | |||
+ | Instead of trying to find a synthetic way to describe <math>EF</math> being tangent to the <math>A</math>-excircle (very hard), we instead consider the foot of the perpendicular from the <math>A</math>-excircle to <math>EF</math>, hoping to force something via the length of the perpendicular. It would be nice if there were an easier way to describe <math>EF</math>, something more closely related to the <math>A</math>-excircle; as we are considering perpendicularity, if we could generate a line parallel to <math>EF</math>, that would be good. | ||
+ | |||
+ | So we recall that it is well known that triangle <math>AEF</math> is similar to <math>ABC</math>. This motivates reflecting <math>BC</math> over the angle bisector at <math>A</math> to obtain <math>B'C'</math>, which is parallel to <math>EF</math> for obvious reasons. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Furthermore, as reflection preserves intersection, <math>B'C'</math> is tangent to the reflection of the <math>A</math>-excircle over the <math>A</math>-angle bisector. But it is well-known that the <math>A</math>-excenter lies on the <math>A</math>-angle bisector, so the <math>A</math>-excircle must be preserved under reflection over the <math>A</math>-excircle. Thus <math>B'C'</math> is tangent to the <math>A</math>-excircle.Yet for all lines parallel to <math>EF</math>, there are only two lines tangent to the <math>A</math>-excircle, and only one possibility for <math>EF</math>, so <math>EF = B'C'</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Thus as <math>ABB'</math> is isoceles, <cmath>[ABC] = \frac{1}{2} \cdot AC \cdot BE = \frac{AC}{2} \cdot \sqrt{AB^2 - AE^2} = \frac{AC}{2} \cdot \sqrt{AB^2 - AB'^2} = \frac{AC}{2} \cdot \sqrt{AB^2 - AB^2} = 0,</cmath> contradiction. <math>\square</math> -alifenix- |
Revision as of 18:06, 19 April 2019
Let be a triangle with obtuse. The [i]-excircle[/i] is a circle in the exterior of that is tangent to side of the triangle and tangent to the extensions of the other two sides. Let , be the feet of the altitudes from and to lines and , respectively. Can line be tangent to the -excircle?
Solution
Instead of trying to find a synthetic way to describe being tangent to the -excircle (very hard), we instead consider the foot of the perpendicular from the -excircle to , hoping to force something via the length of the perpendicular. It would be nice if there were an easier way to describe , something more closely related to the -excircle; as we are considering perpendicularity, if we could generate a line parallel to , that would be good.
So we recall that it is well known that triangle is similar to . This motivates reflecting over the angle bisector at to obtain , which is parallel to for obvious reasons.
Furthermore, as reflection preserves intersection, is tangent to the reflection of the -excircle over the -angle bisector. But it is well-known that the -excenter lies on the -angle bisector, so the -excircle must be preserved under reflection over the -excircle. Thus is tangent to the -excircle.Yet for all lines parallel to , there are only two lines tangent to the -excircle, and only one possibility for , so .
Thus as is isoceles, contradiction. -alifenix-