Finding radius of circle inscribed in trapezium
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle
I was able to deduce a few elementary things
$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful
geometry
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle
I was able to deduce a few elementary things
$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful
geometry
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle
I was able to deduce a few elementary things
$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful
geometry
A circle is inscribed in trapezoid $ABCD$. Let $K,L,M,N$ be the points of intersection of the circle with diagonals $AC$ and $BD$ respectively. $K$ is between $A$ and $L$ and $M$ is between $B$ and $N$. Given that $AK*LC = 16$ and $BM*ND = frac{9}{4}$, find the radius of the circle
I was able to deduce a few elementary things
$AB + CD = AD + BC$ and also tried using power of point and use the given products but didnt get anything useful
geometry
geometry
edited Oct 5 at 13:01
asked Oct 5 at 10:42
saisanjeev
727212
727212
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34
add a comment |
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
When all else fails, get a bigger hammer
...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.
I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.
First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$
Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:
$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$
$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$
This leads to the following equations:
$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$
or:
$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$
Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:
$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$
This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:
$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$
There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:
$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$
Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:
$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$
At least we know it's 16 :)
The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:
$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$
Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.
Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:
$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$
$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$
$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$
If you replace all that into a well-known equation:
$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$
...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):
$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$
Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:
$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$
...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:
$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$
Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:
$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$
$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$
$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$
You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:
$$z=frac{16}9$$
Replace that into (6) and you get:
$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
When all else fails, get a bigger hammer
...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.
I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.
First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$
Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:
$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$
$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$
This leads to the following equations:
$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$
or:
$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$
Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:
$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$
This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:
$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$
There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:
$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$
Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:
$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$
At least we know it's 16 :)
The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:
$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$
Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.
Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:
$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$
$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$
$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$
If you replace all that into a well-known equation:
$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$
...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):
$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$
Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:
$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$
...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:
$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$
Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:
$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$
$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$
$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$
You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:
$$z=frac{16}9$$
Replace that into (6) and you get:
$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
When all else fails, get a bigger hammer
...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.
I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.
First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$
Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:
$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$
$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$
This leads to the following equations:
$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$
or:
$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$
Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:
$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$
This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:
$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$
There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:
$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$
Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:
$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$
At least we know it's 16 :)
The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:
$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$
Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.
Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:
$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$
$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$
$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$
If you replace all that into a well-known equation:
$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$
...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):
$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$
Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:
$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$
...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:
$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$
Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:
$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$
$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$
$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$
You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:
$$z=frac{16}9$$
Replace that into (6) and you get:
$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
When all else fails, get a bigger hammer
...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.
I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.
First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$
Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:
$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$
$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$
This leads to the following equations:
$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$
or:
$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$
Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:
$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$
This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:
$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$
There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:
$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$
Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:
$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$
At least we know it's 16 :)
The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:
$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$
Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.
Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:
$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$
$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$
$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$
If you replace all that into a well-known equation:
$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$
...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):
$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$
Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:
$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$
...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:
$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$
Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:
$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$
$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$
$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$
You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:
$$z=frac{16}9$$
Replace that into (6) and you get:
$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$
When all else fails, get a bigger hammer
...which I did and found that the answer was $R=6$.
I won't explain why $AC$, $BD$ $PR$ and $QS$ concur at $F$. It's just a special case of
Brianchon's theorem. So let's start from there. Notice the angles $angle CAB=angle ACD=alpha$, $angle ABD=angle BDC=beta$ and segment $OF=x$. We'll use them all the time. For the sake of simplicity I will also introduce the following symbols: $AK=p_1$, $LC=p_2$, $BM=q_1$, $DN=q_2$. We know that $p_1p_2=16$ and $q_1q_2=9/4$.
First, let's try to find $p_1=AK$. The same approach will be used to find segments $p_2,q_1,q_2$
Take a look at quadrilateral $AQOK$:
$$AQ=FQcotalpha=AKcos alpha+OKsinvarphi$$
$$QO=AKsinalpha+OKcosvarphi$$
This leads to the following equations:
$$p_1cosalpha+Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha$$
$$p_1sinalpha+Rcosvarphi=R$$
or:
$$Rsinvarphi=(R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha$$
$$Rcosvarphi=R-p_1sinalpha$$
Square these two equations and add them. This will eliminate the angle $varphi$ that we don't care about. You will end up with a quadratic equation with respect to $p_1$:
$$R^2=((R+x)cotalpha-p_1cosalpha)^2+(R-p_1sinalpha)^2$$
This equation has two solutions. The bigger one is actually equal to $AL$ and the smaller one is $AK=p_1$:
$$p_1=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R+x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{1}$$
There is no need to calculate $p_2$ in a similar way. Everything would look the same, except that we would use $R-x$ instead of $R+x$ along the way. So we can obtain an expression for $p_2$ just by replacing $x$ with $-x$:
$$p_2=-sqrt{R^2-frac{1}{2} x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}+(R-x)cos alpha cot alpha +R sin alphatag{2}$$
Now comes the hardest part: you have to multiply (1) and (2). It looks like we are going nowhere... After a lot of simplifications, we get:
$$p_1p_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2alpha left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 alpha) +2 R sin alpha sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 alpha))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{3}$$
At least we know it's 16 :)
The good thing is that we don't have to go through the same torture to find $q_1q_2$, the process is exactly the same except that we have $beta$ instead of $alpha$:
$$q_1q_2=-frac{1}{2} csc ^2beta left(left(R^2+x^2right)cos (2 beta) +2 R sin beta sqrt{4 R^2-2 x^2 (1+cos (2 beta))}-3 R^2+x^2right)tag{4}$$
Like it's not difficult enough we have to introduce the fact that $x$, $alpha$ and $beta$ are not independent! There's a connection between them.
Take a look at triangle $triangle ABC$:
$$AB=AQ+QB=(R+x)(cotalpha+cotbeta)$$
$$BC=BR+RC=BQ+CS=(R+x)cotbeta+(R-x)cotalpha$$
$$AC={2R over sinalpha}$$
If you replace all that into a well-known equation:
$$BC^2=AB^2+AC^2-2 ABcdot ACcosalpha$$
...you will get a very simple relation (trust me):
$$x^2=R^2(1-tanalphatanbeta)tag{5}$$
Now replace (5) into (3) and (4) and we'll get something that we can easily deal with:
$$p_1p_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanbeta}{tanalpha}}right)$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}-2sqrt{1+frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}}right)$$
...or, if we introduce $z=frac{tanalpha}{tanbeta}$:
$$p_1p_2=R^2(2+z-2sqrt{1+z})=R^2(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2=16tag{6}$$
$$q_1q_2=R^2left(2+frac1z-2sqrt{1+frac1z}right)=R^2left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)^2=frac{9}{4}tag{7}$$
Now divide (6) by (7) and you get:
$$left(frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}right)^2=frac{p_1p_2}{q_1q_2}=frac{16}{frac94}=frac{64}{9}$$
$$frac{sqrt{1+z}-1}{sqrt{1+frac1z}-1}=frac{8}{3}$$
$$3(sqrt{1+z}-1)=8left(sqrt{1+frac1z}-1right)tag{8}$$
You should be able to show that equation (8) has only one solution:
$$z=frac{16}9$$
Replace that into (6) and you get:
$$R^2=frac{p_1p_2}{(sqrt{1+z}-1)^2}=36implies R=6$$
answered Nov 22 at 15:55
Oldboy
5,6931627
5,6931627
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
add a comment |
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
Why on earth people downvote without a comment - I just cannot understand. This is not the most beautiful solution, but it's correct and the only one that we have so far. I would like to ask the downvoter to provide a better one and I'll delete my answer immediately.
– Oldboy
Nov 22 at 16:22
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2943226%2ffinding-radius-of-circle-inscribed-in-trapezium%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
Point E? Where is it?
– Oldboy
Oct 5 at 12:15
sorry it was a typo, its actually B
– saisanjeev
Oct 5 at 13:01
Are you sure that the trapezoid is not an isosceles?
– Lanet
Oct 9 at 15:59
@Lanet $AKtimes LC$ would be equal to $BMtimes ND$ if the trapezoid was isosceles.
– Oldboy
Oct 18 at 11:34