A challenging geometry proof?Is this circular logic on geometry proof?Challenging Geometry ProblemGeometry inequality proofProof - Elementar Geometry (parallelogram)Interesting circles hidden in Poncelet's porism configurationEuclediean geometry proofEuclidean Geometry proofOf all polygons inscribed in a given circle which one has the maximum sum of squares of side lengths?

How could a self contained organic body propel itself in space

Alternative to Magnesium's Role in Photosynthesis

Can I lend a small amount of my own money to a bank at the federal funds rate?

Why does this London Underground poster from 1924 have a Star of David atop a Christmas tree?

Why doesn't Starship have four landing legs?

Is there an in-universe explanation given to the senior Imperial Navy Officers as to why Darth Vader serves Emperor Palpatine?

How to prevent a hosting company from accessing a VM's encryption keys?

Did ancient peoples ever hide their treasure behind puzzles?

Board Chinese train at a different station (on-route)

Are sweatpants frowned upon on flights?

How to investigate an unknown 1.5GB file named "sudo" in my Linux home directory?

Are there any to-scale diagrams of the TRAPPIST-1 system?

RAID0 instead of RAID1 or 5, is this crazy?

What is Soda Fountain Etiquette?

Cutting numbers into a specific decimals

Drawing probabilities on a simplex in TikZ

How do I portray irrational anger in first person?

Can two aircraft stay on the same runway at the same time?

Why is there not a willingness from the world to step in between Pakistan and India?

Line Feed in monospace font - Macro

Is the Amazon rainforest the "world's lungs"?

How can I reply to people who accuse me of putting people out of work?

What happens after an Aboleth's body is remade in the Elemental Plane of Water following its death?

What to do about my 1-month-old boy peeing through diapers?



A challenging geometry proof?


Is this circular logic on geometry proof?Challenging Geometry ProblemGeometry inequality proofProof - Elementar Geometry (parallelogram)Interesting circles hidden in Poncelet's porism configurationEuclediean geometry proofEuclidean Geometry proofOf all polygons inscribed in a given circle which one has the maximum sum of squares of side lengths?






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








8












$begingroup$


enter image description here
Given: $C$ on $overlineAB$ such that $BC=3AC$ and $mangle B=2mangle XCB$.

To show: $AX=2AC+BX$



I have verified this result with trigonometry and analytic geometry and double-checked my work with GeoGebra. But it seems like such an elegant result that there should be a purely geometric proof. Any ideas?



I was inspired to investigate this diagram trying to solve a different problem here on MSE. As far as trying to come up with a proof on my own I tried constructing $M,N$ on $overlineAX$ such that $AM=AC$ and $NX=BX$ and drawing some isosceles triangles. That might be fruitful (since you'd only have to show $AM=MN$), but nothing leapt out at me quickly.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Aug 16 at 22:01

















8












$begingroup$


enter image description here
Given: $C$ on $overlineAB$ such that $BC=3AC$ and $mangle B=2mangle XCB$.

To show: $AX=2AC+BX$



I have verified this result with trigonometry and analytic geometry and double-checked my work with GeoGebra. But it seems like such an elegant result that there should be a purely geometric proof. Any ideas?



I was inspired to investigate this diagram trying to solve a different problem here on MSE. As far as trying to come up with a proof on my own I tried constructing $M,N$ on $overlineAX$ such that $AM=AC$ and $NX=BX$ and drawing some isosceles triangles. That might be fruitful (since you'd only have to show $AM=MN$), but nothing leapt out at me quickly.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Aug 16 at 22:01













8












8








8


2



$begingroup$


enter image description here
Given: $C$ on $overlineAB$ such that $BC=3AC$ and $mangle B=2mangle XCB$.

To show: $AX=2AC+BX$



I have verified this result with trigonometry and analytic geometry and double-checked my work with GeoGebra. But it seems like such an elegant result that there should be a purely geometric proof. Any ideas?



I was inspired to investigate this diagram trying to solve a different problem here on MSE. As far as trying to come up with a proof on my own I tried constructing $M,N$ on $overlineAX$ such that $AM=AC$ and $NX=BX$ and drawing some isosceles triangles. That might be fruitful (since you'd only have to show $AM=MN$), but nothing leapt out at me quickly.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




enter image description here
Given: $C$ on $overlineAB$ such that $BC=3AC$ and $mangle B=2mangle XCB$.

To show: $AX=2AC+BX$



I have verified this result with trigonometry and analytic geometry and double-checked my work with GeoGebra. But it seems like such an elegant result that there should be a purely geometric proof. Any ideas?



I was inspired to investigate this diagram trying to solve a different problem here on MSE. As far as trying to come up with a proof on my own I tried constructing $M,N$ on $overlineAX$ such that $AM=AC$ and $NX=BX$ and drawing some isosceles triangles. That might be fruitful (since you'd only have to show $AM=MN$), but nothing leapt out at me quickly.







geometry proof-writing euclidean-geometry






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 16 at 21:53









Matthew DalyMatthew Daly

3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges




3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges














  • $begingroup$
    You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Aug 16 at 22:01
















  • $begingroup$
    You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Aug 16 at 22:01















$begingroup$
You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Aug 16 at 22:01




$begingroup$
You should provide at least a sketch of your proof. It could save answerers from wasting time duplicating your effort. Perhaps someone can even "see" a geometric approach in your equations.
$endgroup$
– Blue
Aug 16 at 22:01










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















8













$begingroup$

OP's own answer shows that the key to the solution is to recognize that point $X$ lies on a hyperbola with foci $A$ and $C$ passing through $B$. Here's a "geometric" derivation of that fact.




Let the trisecting points of $overlineBC$ be $S$ and $T$. Let the angle bisector at $C$ meet $overlineBX$ at $D$, creating isosceles $triangle BCD$. Let $overleftrightarrowDM$ (with $M$ the midpoint of $overlineBC$ be the extended altitude of this triangle, and let $P$ be the projection of $X$ onto this line.



enter image description here



Then we have
$$left.beginalign
textAngle Bis. Thm &implies fracCX=frac = frac2 \[4pt]
triangle DXPsimtriangle DBM &implies frac=frac
endalignright}implies
fracCX=fracCXcdotfrac=2$$

Therefore, $overleftrightarrowDM$ is the directrix, and $C$ the focus, of a hyperbola through $X$ with eccentricity $2$.



Since trisection point $T$ divides $overlineMC$ in the ratio $1:2$, it must be a vertex of the hyperbola. Moreover, since $|ST|:|SC|=1:2$, it follows that $S$ is the center of the hyperbola. By symmetry across that center, $B$ and $A$ are the other vertex and focus, respectively, and the result follows. $square$






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$














  • $begingroup$
    That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
    $endgroup$
    – Matthew Daly
    Aug 17 at 0:11










  • $begingroup$
    Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
    $endgroup$
    – Blue
    Aug 17 at 0:23


















5













$begingroup$

Here is my non-Euclidean proof of the fact, as it was suggested that it might inspire people. Understand that I want a Euclidean proof of the statement, so this proof is not what I'm looking for here.



Arrange the diagram on the Cartesian plane such that C is at the origin and B is at (1,0). Let $(x,y)$ be the coordinates of point X. Then, dropping a perpendicular from X to $overlineAB$ we see that
$$tantheta=fracyx$$
$$tan2theta=frac2tantheta1-tan^2theta=fracy1-x$$



by the double angle formula. Combining those two formulas gives us



$$fracy1-x=frac2y/x1-y^2/x^2=frac2xyx^2-y^2$$
$$2x(1-x)=x^2-y^2$$
$$y^2=x^2-2x(1-x)$$
$$y^2=3x^2-2x$$



This is the equation of a hyperbola with foci at $(-frac13,0)=A$ and $(1,0)=B$ and a vertex at $(frac23,0)$. Since this hyperbola is the locus of points $X$ such that $AX-BX=frac23=2AC$, the statement follows.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$






















    1













    $begingroup$

    I hope that this proof is the geometry you're looking for (it is geometry I was taught in high school at least).



    Let $P$ be the point such that the line $PX$ forms the angle $angle BPX=angle PBX$. This should lie between the lines $XC$ and $XB$. The triangles $PBX$ and $XPC$ are isosceles, and therefore we have $XB=XP=PC$. Applying the law of cosines for both triangles we obtain that



    $$BP=2BXcos2theta~~,~~XC=2BXcostheta$$



    and since $BP+PC=3x=BX(1+2cos2theta)$ ($AB=4x$ as per the sketch provided) we express the following lengths in terms of $x, theta$:
    $$BX=frac3x1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~ BP=frac6xcos2theta1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~CX=frac6xcostheta1+2cos2theta$$



    The law of cosines on $ABX$ reads:



    $$beginalignAX^2=&AB^2+BX^2-2ABcdot BXcos2theta\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(16(1+2cos2theta)^2-24(1+2cos2theta)cos2theta+9Big)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(25+40 cos2theta+16 cos^2 2thetaBig)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2(2(1+2cos2theta)+3)^2\=&(BX+2AC)^2endalign$$



    and the proof is complete.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$














    • $begingroup$
      Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
      $endgroup$
      – DinosaurEgg
      Aug 17 at 2:18











    • $begingroup$
      Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
      $endgroup$
      – DinosaurEgg
      Aug 17 at 2:43










    • $begingroup$
      I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
      $endgroup$
      – Matthew Daly
      Aug 17 at 9:56


















    0













    $begingroup$

    Unfortunately, when I tried to edit DinosaurEgg's proof, the mods rejected it for "deviating from the original intent of the post". With all due respect, I disagree with them, but it was a pretty dramatic revision. So I'll post it here so that people can appreciate the elegance. DinosaurEgg, if you see this, feel free to edit this into your answer if you like, and I'll delete this answer.



    enter image description here



    Construct $P$ on $overlineAB$ such that $angle XPBcongangle B$. $triangle XPB$ is obviously isosceles. Since $angle XCP=theta$ and $angle XPB=2theta$, $triangle XCP$ is also isosceles by the External Angle Theorem. Therefore, $XB=XP=PC$. Dropping the perpendicular from $X$, it should be clear that $cos B=fracPB/2XB$, or $$PB=2XBcos B$$ Since we know that $BC=3AC$, it follows that $AB=4AC$ and $PB=BC-PC=3AC-XB$.



    Combining all of that with the Law of Cosines applied to $triangle ABX$ yields



    $$begineqnarray*
    AX & ^2= & XB^2+AB^2-2ABcdot XBcos B\
    & = & XB^2+AB^2-ABcdot PB\
    & = & XB^2+(4AC)^2-4AC(3AC-XB)\
    & = & XB^2+16AC^2-12AC^2+4XBcdot AC\
    & = & XB^2+4XBcdot AC+4AC^2\
    & = & (XB+2AC)^2
    endeqnarray*$$






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      Your Answer








      StackExchange.ready(function()
      var channelOptions =
      tags: "".split(" "),
      id: "69"
      ;
      initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

      StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
      // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
      if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
      StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
      createEditor();
      );

      else
      createEditor();

      );

      function createEditor()
      StackExchange.prepareEditor(
      heartbeatType: 'answer',
      autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
      convertImagesToLinks: true,
      noModals: true,
      showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
      reputationToPostImages: 10,
      bindNavPrevention: true,
      postfix: "",
      imageUploader:
      brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
      contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
      allowUrls: true
      ,
      noCode: true, onDemand: true,
      discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
      ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      StackExchange.ready(
      function ()
      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3325533%2fa-challenging-geometry-proof%23new-answer', 'question_page');

      );

      Post as a guest















      Required, but never shown

























      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes








      4 Answers
      4






      active

      oldest

      votes









      active

      oldest

      votes






      active

      oldest

      votes









      8













      $begingroup$

      OP's own answer shows that the key to the solution is to recognize that point $X$ lies on a hyperbola with foci $A$ and $C$ passing through $B$. Here's a "geometric" derivation of that fact.




      Let the trisecting points of $overlineBC$ be $S$ and $T$. Let the angle bisector at $C$ meet $overlineBX$ at $D$, creating isosceles $triangle BCD$. Let $overleftrightarrowDM$ (with $M$ the midpoint of $overlineBC$ be the extended altitude of this triangle, and let $P$ be the projection of $X$ onto this line.



      enter image description here



      Then we have
      $$left.beginalign
      textAngle Bis. Thm &implies fracCX=frac = frac2 \[4pt]
      triangle DXPsimtriangle DBM &implies frac=frac
      endalignright}implies
      fracCX=fracCXcdotfrac=2$$

      Therefore, $overleftrightarrowDM$ is the directrix, and $C$ the focus, of a hyperbola through $X$ with eccentricity $2$.



      Since trisection point $T$ divides $overlineMC$ in the ratio $1:2$, it must be a vertex of the hyperbola. Moreover, since $|ST|:|SC|=1:2$, it follows that $S$ is the center of the hyperbola. By symmetry across that center, $B$ and $A$ are the other vertex and focus, respectively, and the result follows. $square$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Daly
        Aug 17 at 0:11










      • $begingroup$
        Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Blue
        Aug 17 at 0:23















      8













      $begingroup$

      OP's own answer shows that the key to the solution is to recognize that point $X$ lies on a hyperbola with foci $A$ and $C$ passing through $B$. Here's a "geometric" derivation of that fact.




      Let the trisecting points of $overlineBC$ be $S$ and $T$. Let the angle bisector at $C$ meet $overlineBX$ at $D$, creating isosceles $triangle BCD$. Let $overleftrightarrowDM$ (with $M$ the midpoint of $overlineBC$ be the extended altitude of this triangle, and let $P$ be the projection of $X$ onto this line.



      enter image description here



      Then we have
      $$left.beginalign
      textAngle Bis. Thm &implies fracCX=frac = frac2 \[4pt]
      triangle DXPsimtriangle DBM &implies frac=frac
      endalignright}implies
      fracCX=fracCXcdotfrac=2$$

      Therefore, $overleftrightarrowDM$ is the directrix, and $C$ the focus, of a hyperbola through $X$ with eccentricity $2$.



      Since trisection point $T$ divides $overlineMC$ in the ratio $1:2$, it must be a vertex of the hyperbola. Moreover, since $|ST|:|SC|=1:2$, it follows that $S$ is the center of the hyperbola. By symmetry across that center, $B$ and $A$ are the other vertex and focus, respectively, and the result follows. $square$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$














      • $begingroup$
        That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Daly
        Aug 17 at 0:11










      • $begingroup$
        Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Blue
        Aug 17 at 0:23













      8














      8










      8







      $begingroup$

      OP's own answer shows that the key to the solution is to recognize that point $X$ lies on a hyperbola with foci $A$ and $C$ passing through $B$. Here's a "geometric" derivation of that fact.




      Let the trisecting points of $overlineBC$ be $S$ and $T$. Let the angle bisector at $C$ meet $overlineBX$ at $D$, creating isosceles $triangle BCD$. Let $overleftrightarrowDM$ (with $M$ the midpoint of $overlineBC$ be the extended altitude of this triangle, and let $P$ be the projection of $X$ onto this line.



      enter image description here



      Then we have
      $$left.beginalign
      textAngle Bis. Thm &implies fracCX=frac = frac2 \[4pt]
      triangle DXPsimtriangle DBM &implies frac=frac
      endalignright}implies
      fracCX=fracCXcdotfrac=2$$

      Therefore, $overleftrightarrowDM$ is the directrix, and $C$ the focus, of a hyperbola through $X$ with eccentricity $2$.



      Since trisection point $T$ divides $overlineMC$ in the ratio $1:2$, it must be a vertex of the hyperbola. Moreover, since $|ST|:|SC|=1:2$, it follows that $S$ is the center of the hyperbola. By symmetry across that center, $B$ and $A$ are the other vertex and focus, respectively, and the result follows. $square$






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



      OP's own answer shows that the key to the solution is to recognize that point $X$ lies on a hyperbola with foci $A$ and $C$ passing through $B$. Here's a "geometric" derivation of that fact.




      Let the trisecting points of $overlineBC$ be $S$ and $T$. Let the angle bisector at $C$ meet $overlineBX$ at $D$, creating isosceles $triangle BCD$. Let $overleftrightarrowDM$ (with $M$ the midpoint of $overlineBC$ be the extended altitude of this triangle, and let $P$ be the projection of $X$ onto this line.



      enter image description here



      Then we have
      $$left.beginalign
      textAngle Bis. Thm &implies fracCX=frac = frac2 \[4pt]
      triangle DXPsimtriangle DBM &implies frac=frac
      endalignright}implies
      fracCX=fracCXcdotfrac=2$$

      Therefore, $overleftrightarrowDM$ is the directrix, and $C$ the focus, of a hyperbola through $X$ with eccentricity $2$.



      Since trisection point $T$ divides $overlineMC$ in the ratio $1:2$, it must be a vertex of the hyperbola. Moreover, since $|ST|:|SC|=1:2$, it follows that $S$ is the center of the hyperbola. By symmetry across that center, $B$ and $A$ are the other vertex and focus, respectively, and the result follows. $square$







      share|cite|improve this answer














      share|cite|improve this answer



      share|cite|improve this answer








      edited Aug 16 at 23:58

























      answered Aug 16 at 23:35









      BlueBlue

      52.6k11 gold badges74 silver badges167 bronze badges




      52.6k11 gold badges74 silver badges167 bronze badges














      • $begingroup$
        That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Daly
        Aug 17 at 0:11










      • $begingroup$
        Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Blue
        Aug 17 at 0:23
















      • $begingroup$
        That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
        $endgroup$
        – Matthew Daly
        Aug 17 at 0:11










      • $begingroup$
        Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
        $endgroup$
        – Blue
        Aug 17 at 0:23















      $begingroup$
      That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
      $endgroup$
      – Matthew Daly
      Aug 17 at 0:11




      $begingroup$
      That's really nice. I've never seen a use for the directrix and eccentricity of a hyperbola before, so it's very reassuring to see applications for it!
      $endgroup$
      – Matthew Daly
      Aug 17 at 0:11












      $begingroup$
      Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Aug 17 at 0:23




      $begingroup$
      Thanks. :) I'm always pleased when the focus-directrix definition of conics (not just parabolas) comes into play. ... I was right about how posting your own proof would be a time-saver. Even if my final argument hadn't used the hyperbola, just knowing it was there made constructing a GeoGebra sketch super-simple, freeing me to get on with exploring possible approaches. So, thanks for that, too. :)
      $endgroup$
      – Blue
      Aug 17 at 0:23













      5













      $begingroup$

      Here is my non-Euclidean proof of the fact, as it was suggested that it might inspire people. Understand that I want a Euclidean proof of the statement, so this proof is not what I'm looking for here.



      Arrange the diagram on the Cartesian plane such that C is at the origin and B is at (1,0). Let $(x,y)$ be the coordinates of point X. Then, dropping a perpendicular from X to $overlineAB$ we see that
      $$tantheta=fracyx$$
      $$tan2theta=frac2tantheta1-tan^2theta=fracy1-x$$



      by the double angle formula. Combining those two formulas gives us



      $$fracy1-x=frac2y/x1-y^2/x^2=frac2xyx^2-y^2$$
      $$2x(1-x)=x^2-y^2$$
      $$y^2=x^2-2x(1-x)$$
      $$y^2=3x^2-2x$$



      This is the equation of a hyperbola with foci at $(-frac13,0)=A$ and $(1,0)=B$ and a vertex at $(frac23,0)$. Since this hyperbola is the locus of points $X$ such that $AX-BX=frac23=2AC$, the statement follows.






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$



















        5













        $begingroup$

        Here is my non-Euclidean proof of the fact, as it was suggested that it might inspire people. Understand that I want a Euclidean proof of the statement, so this proof is not what I'm looking for here.



        Arrange the diagram on the Cartesian plane such that C is at the origin and B is at (1,0). Let $(x,y)$ be the coordinates of point X. Then, dropping a perpendicular from X to $overlineAB$ we see that
        $$tantheta=fracyx$$
        $$tan2theta=frac2tantheta1-tan^2theta=fracy1-x$$



        by the double angle formula. Combining those two formulas gives us



        $$fracy1-x=frac2y/x1-y^2/x^2=frac2xyx^2-y^2$$
        $$2x(1-x)=x^2-y^2$$
        $$y^2=x^2-2x(1-x)$$
        $$y^2=3x^2-2x$$



        This is the equation of a hyperbola with foci at $(-frac13,0)=A$ and $(1,0)=B$ and a vertex at $(frac23,0)$. Since this hyperbola is the locus of points $X$ such that $AX-BX=frac23=2AC$, the statement follows.






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$

















          5














          5










          5







          $begingroup$

          Here is my non-Euclidean proof of the fact, as it was suggested that it might inspire people. Understand that I want a Euclidean proof of the statement, so this proof is not what I'm looking for here.



          Arrange the diagram on the Cartesian plane such that C is at the origin and B is at (1,0). Let $(x,y)$ be the coordinates of point X. Then, dropping a perpendicular from X to $overlineAB$ we see that
          $$tantheta=fracyx$$
          $$tan2theta=frac2tantheta1-tan^2theta=fracy1-x$$



          by the double angle formula. Combining those two formulas gives us



          $$fracy1-x=frac2y/x1-y^2/x^2=frac2xyx^2-y^2$$
          $$2x(1-x)=x^2-y^2$$
          $$y^2=x^2-2x(1-x)$$
          $$y^2=3x^2-2x$$



          This is the equation of a hyperbola with foci at $(-frac13,0)=A$ and $(1,0)=B$ and a vertex at $(frac23,0)$. Since this hyperbola is the locus of points $X$ such that $AX-BX=frac23=2AC$, the statement follows.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          Here is my non-Euclidean proof of the fact, as it was suggested that it might inspire people. Understand that I want a Euclidean proof of the statement, so this proof is not what I'm looking for here.



          Arrange the diagram on the Cartesian plane such that C is at the origin and B is at (1,0). Let $(x,y)$ be the coordinates of point X. Then, dropping a perpendicular from X to $overlineAB$ we see that
          $$tantheta=fracyx$$
          $$tan2theta=frac2tantheta1-tan^2theta=fracy1-x$$



          by the double angle formula. Combining those two formulas gives us



          $$fracy1-x=frac2y/x1-y^2/x^2=frac2xyx^2-y^2$$
          $$2x(1-x)=x^2-y^2$$
          $$y^2=x^2-2x(1-x)$$
          $$y^2=3x^2-2x$$



          This is the equation of a hyperbola with foci at $(-frac13,0)=A$ and $(1,0)=B$ and a vertex at $(frac23,0)$. Since this hyperbola is the locus of points $X$ such that $AX-BX=frac23=2AC$, the statement follows.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Aug 16 at 22:31

























          answered Aug 16 at 22:24









          Matthew DalyMatthew Daly

          3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges




          3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges
























              1













              $begingroup$

              I hope that this proof is the geometry you're looking for (it is geometry I was taught in high school at least).



              Let $P$ be the point such that the line $PX$ forms the angle $angle BPX=angle PBX$. This should lie between the lines $XC$ and $XB$. The triangles $PBX$ and $XPC$ are isosceles, and therefore we have $XB=XP=PC$. Applying the law of cosines for both triangles we obtain that



              $$BP=2BXcos2theta~~,~~XC=2BXcostheta$$



              and since $BP+PC=3x=BX(1+2cos2theta)$ ($AB=4x$ as per the sketch provided) we express the following lengths in terms of $x, theta$:
              $$BX=frac3x1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~ BP=frac6xcos2theta1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~CX=frac6xcostheta1+2cos2theta$$



              The law of cosines on $ABX$ reads:



              $$beginalignAX^2=&AB^2+BX^2-2ABcdot BXcos2theta\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(16(1+2cos2theta)^2-24(1+2cos2theta)cos2theta+9Big)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(25+40 cos2theta+16 cos^2 2thetaBig)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2(2(1+2cos2theta)+3)^2\=&(BX+2AC)^2endalign$$



              and the proof is complete.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$














              • $begingroup$
                Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:18











              • $begingroup$
                Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:43










              • $begingroup$
                I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
                $endgroup$
                – Matthew Daly
                Aug 17 at 9:56















              1













              $begingroup$

              I hope that this proof is the geometry you're looking for (it is geometry I was taught in high school at least).



              Let $P$ be the point such that the line $PX$ forms the angle $angle BPX=angle PBX$. This should lie between the lines $XC$ and $XB$. The triangles $PBX$ and $XPC$ are isosceles, and therefore we have $XB=XP=PC$. Applying the law of cosines for both triangles we obtain that



              $$BP=2BXcos2theta~~,~~XC=2BXcostheta$$



              and since $BP+PC=3x=BX(1+2cos2theta)$ ($AB=4x$ as per the sketch provided) we express the following lengths in terms of $x, theta$:
              $$BX=frac3x1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~ BP=frac6xcos2theta1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~CX=frac6xcostheta1+2cos2theta$$



              The law of cosines on $ABX$ reads:



              $$beginalignAX^2=&AB^2+BX^2-2ABcdot BXcos2theta\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(16(1+2cos2theta)^2-24(1+2cos2theta)cos2theta+9Big)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(25+40 cos2theta+16 cos^2 2thetaBig)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2(2(1+2cos2theta)+3)^2\=&(BX+2AC)^2endalign$$



              and the proof is complete.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$














              • $begingroup$
                Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:18











              • $begingroup$
                Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:43










              • $begingroup$
                I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
                $endgroup$
                – Matthew Daly
                Aug 17 at 9:56













              1














              1










              1







              $begingroup$

              I hope that this proof is the geometry you're looking for (it is geometry I was taught in high school at least).



              Let $P$ be the point such that the line $PX$ forms the angle $angle BPX=angle PBX$. This should lie between the lines $XC$ and $XB$. The triangles $PBX$ and $XPC$ are isosceles, and therefore we have $XB=XP=PC$. Applying the law of cosines for both triangles we obtain that



              $$BP=2BXcos2theta~~,~~XC=2BXcostheta$$



              and since $BP+PC=3x=BX(1+2cos2theta)$ ($AB=4x$ as per the sketch provided) we express the following lengths in terms of $x, theta$:
              $$BX=frac3x1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~ BP=frac6xcos2theta1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~CX=frac6xcostheta1+2cos2theta$$



              The law of cosines on $ABX$ reads:



              $$beginalignAX^2=&AB^2+BX^2-2ABcdot BXcos2theta\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(16(1+2cos2theta)^2-24(1+2cos2theta)cos2theta+9Big)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(25+40 cos2theta+16 cos^2 2thetaBig)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2(2(1+2cos2theta)+3)^2\=&(BX+2AC)^2endalign$$



              and the proof is complete.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              I hope that this proof is the geometry you're looking for (it is geometry I was taught in high school at least).



              Let $P$ be the point such that the line $PX$ forms the angle $angle BPX=angle PBX$. This should lie between the lines $XC$ and $XB$. The triangles $PBX$ and $XPC$ are isosceles, and therefore we have $XB=XP=PC$. Applying the law of cosines for both triangles we obtain that



              $$BP=2BXcos2theta~~,~~XC=2BXcostheta$$



              and since $BP+PC=3x=BX(1+2cos2theta)$ ($AB=4x$ as per the sketch provided) we express the following lengths in terms of $x, theta$:
              $$BX=frac3x1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~ BP=frac6xcos2theta1+2cos2theta~~~,~~~CX=frac6xcostheta1+2cos2theta$$



              The law of cosines on $ABX$ reads:



              $$beginalignAX^2=&AB^2+BX^2-2ABcdot BXcos2theta\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(16(1+2cos2theta)^2-24(1+2cos2theta)cos2theta+9Big)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2Big(25+40 cos2theta+16 cos^2 2thetaBig)\=&fracx^2(1+2cos2theta)^2(2(1+2cos2theta)+3)^2\=&(BX+2AC)^2endalign$$



              and the proof is complete.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Aug 17 at 2:17

























              answered Aug 17 at 0:40









              DinosaurEggDinosaurEgg

              1,9553 silver badges12 bronze badges




              1,9553 silver badges12 bronze badges














              • $begingroup$
                Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:18











              • $begingroup$
                Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:43










              • $begingroup$
                I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
                $endgroup$
                – Matthew Daly
                Aug 17 at 9:56
















              • $begingroup$
                Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:18











              • $begingroup$
                Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
                $endgroup$
                – DinosaurEgg
                Aug 17 at 2:43










              • $begingroup$
                I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
                $endgroup$
                – Matthew Daly
                Aug 17 at 9:56















              $begingroup$
              Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
              $endgroup$
              – DinosaurEgg
              Aug 17 at 2:18





              $begingroup$
              Edited and corrected. As pointed out, the angle is unconstrained. The equality naturally comes out by simple algebraic manipulations.
              $endgroup$
              – DinosaurEgg
              Aug 17 at 2:18













              $begingroup$
              Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
              $endgroup$
              – DinosaurEgg
              Aug 17 at 2:43




              $begingroup$
              Also, I think since trigonometric manipulations did not play any deep role here (they only serve as mere labels for ratios between lengths if you think about it),my intuition is that there must be a solution doesn't make use of the law of cosines at all.
              $endgroup$
              – DinosaurEgg
              Aug 17 at 2:43












              $begingroup$
              I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
              $endgroup$
              – Matthew Daly
              Aug 17 at 9:56




              $begingroup$
              I think you need the relationship between $BX$ and $PX$ (although it follows more simply without LoC), and also the last LoC brings $AX$ into the picture. But the proof could be shorter -- you definitely use that XPC is isosceles, but the calculation for $CX$ is extraneous. I'll play with it and propose an edit (plus a diagram, which will help people). But wow! This either avoids (or hides very well) the hyperbola connection that Blue and I relied on. Fantastic work!
              $endgroup$
              – Matthew Daly
              Aug 17 at 9:56











              0













              $begingroup$

              Unfortunately, when I tried to edit DinosaurEgg's proof, the mods rejected it for "deviating from the original intent of the post". With all due respect, I disagree with them, but it was a pretty dramatic revision. So I'll post it here so that people can appreciate the elegance. DinosaurEgg, if you see this, feel free to edit this into your answer if you like, and I'll delete this answer.



              enter image description here



              Construct $P$ on $overlineAB$ such that $angle XPBcongangle B$. $triangle XPB$ is obviously isosceles. Since $angle XCP=theta$ and $angle XPB=2theta$, $triangle XCP$ is also isosceles by the External Angle Theorem. Therefore, $XB=XP=PC$. Dropping the perpendicular from $X$, it should be clear that $cos B=fracPB/2XB$, or $$PB=2XBcos B$$ Since we know that $BC=3AC$, it follows that $AB=4AC$ and $PB=BC-PC=3AC-XB$.



              Combining all of that with the Law of Cosines applied to $triangle ABX$ yields



              $$begineqnarray*
              AX & ^2= & XB^2+AB^2-2ABcdot XBcos B\
              & = & XB^2+AB^2-ABcdot PB\
              & = & XB^2+(4AC)^2-4AC(3AC-XB)\
              & = & XB^2+16AC^2-12AC^2+4XBcdot AC\
              & = & XB^2+4XBcdot AC+4AC^2\
              & = & (XB+2AC)^2
              endeqnarray*$$






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$



















                0













                $begingroup$

                Unfortunately, when I tried to edit DinosaurEgg's proof, the mods rejected it for "deviating from the original intent of the post". With all due respect, I disagree with them, but it was a pretty dramatic revision. So I'll post it here so that people can appreciate the elegance. DinosaurEgg, if you see this, feel free to edit this into your answer if you like, and I'll delete this answer.



                enter image description here



                Construct $P$ on $overlineAB$ such that $angle XPBcongangle B$. $triangle XPB$ is obviously isosceles. Since $angle XCP=theta$ and $angle XPB=2theta$, $triangle XCP$ is also isosceles by the External Angle Theorem. Therefore, $XB=XP=PC$. Dropping the perpendicular from $X$, it should be clear that $cos B=fracPB/2XB$, or $$PB=2XBcos B$$ Since we know that $BC=3AC$, it follows that $AB=4AC$ and $PB=BC-PC=3AC-XB$.



                Combining all of that with the Law of Cosines applied to $triangle ABX$ yields



                $$begineqnarray*
                AX & ^2= & XB^2+AB^2-2ABcdot XBcos B\
                & = & XB^2+AB^2-ABcdot PB\
                & = & XB^2+(4AC)^2-4AC(3AC-XB)\
                & = & XB^2+16AC^2-12AC^2+4XBcdot AC\
                & = & XB^2+4XBcdot AC+4AC^2\
                & = & (XB+2AC)^2
                endeqnarray*$$






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$

















                  0














                  0










                  0







                  $begingroup$

                  Unfortunately, when I tried to edit DinosaurEgg's proof, the mods rejected it for "deviating from the original intent of the post". With all due respect, I disagree with them, but it was a pretty dramatic revision. So I'll post it here so that people can appreciate the elegance. DinosaurEgg, if you see this, feel free to edit this into your answer if you like, and I'll delete this answer.



                  enter image description here



                  Construct $P$ on $overlineAB$ such that $angle XPBcongangle B$. $triangle XPB$ is obviously isosceles. Since $angle XCP=theta$ and $angle XPB=2theta$, $triangle XCP$ is also isosceles by the External Angle Theorem. Therefore, $XB=XP=PC$. Dropping the perpendicular from $X$, it should be clear that $cos B=fracPB/2XB$, or $$PB=2XBcos B$$ Since we know that $BC=3AC$, it follows that $AB=4AC$ and $PB=BC-PC=3AC-XB$.



                  Combining all of that with the Law of Cosines applied to $triangle ABX$ yields



                  $$begineqnarray*
                  AX & ^2= & XB^2+AB^2-2ABcdot XBcos B\
                  & = & XB^2+AB^2-ABcdot PB\
                  & = & XB^2+(4AC)^2-4AC(3AC-XB)\
                  & = & XB^2+16AC^2-12AC^2+4XBcdot AC\
                  & = & XB^2+4XBcdot AC+4AC^2\
                  & = & (XB+2AC)^2
                  endeqnarray*$$






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  Unfortunately, when I tried to edit DinosaurEgg's proof, the mods rejected it for "deviating from the original intent of the post". With all due respect, I disagree with them, but it was a pretty dramatic revision. So I'll post it here so that people can appreciate the elegance. DinosaurEgg, if you see this, feel free to edit this into your answer if you like, and I'll delete this answer.



                  enter image description here



                  Construct $P$ on $overlineAB$ such that $angle XPBcongangle B$. $triangle XPB$ is obviously isosceles. Since $angle XCP=theta$ and $angle XPB=2theta$, $triangle XCP$ is also isosceles by the External Angle Theorem. Therefore, $XB=XP=PC$. Dropping the perpendicular from $X$, it should be clear that $cos B=fracPB/2XB$, or $$PB=2XBcos B$$ Since we know that $BC=3AC$, it follows that $AB=4AC$ and $PB=BC-PC=3AC-XB$.



                  Combining all of that with the Law of Cosines applied to $triangle ABX$ yields



                  $$begineqnarray*
                  AX & ^2= & XB^2+AB^2-2ABcdot XBcos B\
                  & = & XB^2+AB^2-ABcdot PB\
                  & = & XB^2+(4AC)^2-4AC(3AC-XB)\
                  & = & XB^2+16AC^2-12AC^2+4XBcdot AC\
                  & = & XB^2+4XBcdot AC+4AC^2\
                  & = & (XB+2AC)^2
                  endeqnarray*$$







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Aug 18 at 12:39









                  Matthew DalyMatthew Daly

                  3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges




                  3,4392 silver badges24 bronze badges






























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                      • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                      But avoid


                      • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                      • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

                      Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                      To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      StackExchange.ready(
                      function ()
                      StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3325533%2fa-challenging-geometry-proof%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                      );

                      Post as a guest















                      Required, but never shown





















































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown

































                      Required, but never shown














                      Required, but never shown












                      Required, but never shown







                      Required, but never shown







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Category:9 (number) SubcategoriesMedia in category "9 (number)"Navigation menuUpload mediaGND ID: 4485639-8Library of Congress authority ID: sh85091979ReasonatorScholiaStatistics

                      Circuit construction for execution of conditional statements using least significant bitHow are two different registers being used as “control”?How exactly is the stated composite state of the two registers being produced using the $R_zz$ controlled rotations?Efficiently performing controlled rotations in HHLWould this quantum algorithm implementation work?How to prepare a superposed states of odd integers from $1$ to $sqrtN$?Why is this implementation of the order finding algorithm not working?Circuit construction for Hamiltonian simulationHow can I invert the least significant bit of a certain term of a superposed state?Implementing an oracleImplementing a controlled sum operation

                      Magento 2 “No Payment Methods” in Admin New OrderHow to integrate Paypal Express Checkout with the Magento APIMagento 1.5 - Sales > Order > edit order and shipping methods disappearAuto Invoice Check/Money Order Payment methodAdd more simple payment methods?Shipping methods not showingWhat should I do to change payment methods if changing the configuration has no effects?1.9 - No Payment Methods showing upMy Payment Methods not Showing for downloadable/virtual product when checkout?Magento2 API to access internal payment methodHow to call an existing payment methods in the registration form?