Fermat point for quadrilaterals

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter littlemathquark
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the location of the Fermat point for quadrilaterals, addressing both convex and concave cases. Participants explore the properties, uniqueness, and proofs related to the Fermat point in these geometric configurations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the Fermat point for convex quadrilaterals is located at the intersection of the diagonals.
  • Others suggest that for concave quadrilaterals, the Fermat point may be at a collapsed vertex.
  • One participant expresses doubt about the uniqueness of the Fermat point, questioning whether it can be defined similarly to the case of triangles, where three circles intersect at a single point.
  • Another participant argues that the Fermat point is unique for convex quadrilaterals and suggests it may also be unique for concave quadrilaterals, although this remains unproven.
  • There is a discussion about the optimization nature of finding the Fermat point, with some participants suspecting a finite set of solutions rather than a unique one.
  • One participant presents a mathematical argument involving inequalities to support the claim that the intersection of diagonals minimizes the sum of distances in convex quadrilaterals, but admits to being unable to prove this for concave quadrilaterals.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the uniqueness of the Fermat point for quadrilaterals, with multiple competing views on its location and properties. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the concave case and the general proof of the Fermat point's existence.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of formal proofs for the concave quadrilateral case and the challenges of discussing geometric concepts without visual aids. The discussion also highlights the complexity of optimization problems in relation to the Fermat point.

littlemathquark
Messages
204
Reaction score
26
TL;DR
Fermat point for quadrilaterals
Where is the Fermat point for quadrilaterals?
I think this point on the intersection of diagonals for convex quadrilaterals and it can be proof. But if quadrilateral would be concav, where is Fermat point and proof?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think it must be on the collapsed vertice.
 
littlemathquark said:
TL;DR Summary: Fermat point for quadrilaterals

Where is the Fermat point for quadrilaterals?
I think this point on the intersection of diagonals for convex quadrilaterals and it can be proof. But if quadrilateral would be concav, where is Fermat point and proof?
I doubt that it is unique. You can make three circles intersect in a single point,

495px-01_Dreieck%2C_1._Fermat-Punkt-1.svg.png


but can you do that with four circles?
 
Do you doubt for convex or concav quadrilateral? It's unique for convex stiuation surely because I know how can I proof. I think it's unique also for concav. Ok 3 circle to find Fermat-Toricelli point for triangle but
Why do you think of four circle for quadrilateral?
 
littlemathquark said:
Do you doubt for convex or concav quadrilateral? It's unique for convex stiuation surely because I know how can I proof. I think it's unique also for concav. Ok 3 circle to find Fermat-Toricelli point for triangle but
Why do you think of four circle for quadrilateral?
You asked about an arbitrary quadrilateral. It is ultimately an optimization problem and whether the set of feasible points is convex or not is crucial for optimization problems. Even with the restriction to convex sets, it is not obvious and you have to prove it. I suspect a finite set of solutions, but not necessarily of cardinality one. But that's a shot in the dark and I don't have a counterexample. I only meant that the Fermat point is already an unproven statement.
 
I mention about plane quadrilateral, otherwise may not exist that point, you are right.
 
littlemathquark said:
I mention about plane quadrilateral, otherwise may not exist that point, you are right.
It isn't obvious even in a plane. You have four arbitrary circles for which the sum of their diameters has to be minimal in a unique intersection point of all four. But as I already said, it is difficult to discuss geometry with only words.
 
fresh_42 said:
It isn't obvious even in a plane. You have four arbitrary circles for which the sum of their diameters has to be minimal in a unique intersection point of all four. But as I already said, it is difficult to discuss geometry with only words.
I want to show that point of intersection of diagonals can take Fermat point for plane convex qudrilaterals:

Let point O be intersection of diagonals. Let ABCD be a convex plane qudrilateral and take a M point and connect that point to the vertices of qudrilateral. İt's true the inequalities ##AC<MA+MC## in AMC triangle and ##BD<MB+MC## in BMD triangle. If we add that inequalities

##AC+BD=AO+OC+BO+OD<AM+CM+BM+DM## so if M=O then sum of AC+BD must be minimum.

I am not able to proof for concave quadrilateral.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 105 ·
4
Replies
105
Views
9K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
20K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K