Beam me down
- 46
- 0
I'm having some trouble with one particular geometry proof:
From that I've drawn the following:
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/139/circle9we.gif
\angle ADB = \angle CED (as \angle ADB and \angle CED are alternant sements)
\angle CBD = 180 - \angle CED (1) (as they are opposite angles in a cyclic quadrilateral)
180 - \angle CBD = \angle DBA (2) as CBA is a straight line
\therefore \angle CED = \angle DBA substitute (1) into (2) This indicates that \angle BDA = \angle DBA. Is that right? And is that enough to prove that \bigtriangleup ABD \sim \bigtriangleup CDE ?
From a point A outside a circle, a secant ABC is drawn cutting the circle at B and C, and a tangent AD touching at D. A chord DE is drawn equal in length to chord DB. Prove that triangles ABD and CDE are similar.
From that I've drawn the following:
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/139/circle9we.gif
\angle ADB = \angle CED (as \angle ADB and \angle CED are alternant sements)
\angle CBD = 180 - \angle CED (1) (as they are opposite angles in a cyclic quadrilateral)
180 - \angle CBD = \angle DBA (2) as CBA is a straight line
\therefore \angle CED = \angle DBA substitute (1) into (2) This indicates that \angle BDA = \angle DBA. Is that right? And is that enough to prove that \bigtriangleup ABD \sim \bigtriangleup CDE ?
Last edited by a moderator: