MHB Proof Quest: Non-Equilateral Triangle Enclosing Point Z

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around proving a mathematical inequality involving a non-equilateral triangle and a point Z inside it. The key points include the relationship between the heights of the triangle and the perpendicular distances from point Z to the sides of the triangle. Participants suggest using area calculations and properties of harmonic means to establish the required proofs. There is a specific focus on demonstrating that the sum of ratios of these distances to the corresponding heights equals one. The challenge lies in addressing the non-parallel nature of the distances involved due to the triangle's shape.
frusciante
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I am struggling with this question, it would be easy enough if the triangle was equilateral but that is not necessarily the case.

Let (ha, hb, hc) be heights in the triangle ABC, and let Z be a point inside the triangle.

Further to this, consider the points P, Q, R on the sides AB, BC and AC, respectively. P, Q, R lie such that ZP is perpendicular to AB, ZQ is perpendicular to BC, and ZR is perpendicular to AC.

Show that ha/ZQ + hb/ZR + hc/ZP >= 9.

So far I have considered;
Area(ABC) = Area(AZC) + Area(AZB) + Area(BZC) = 0,5*(AC*ZR)+0,5*(AB*ZP)+0,5*(BC*ZQ)

But I don't know if that is any useful. Any comments?

Here is a sketched form of the triangle;

View attachment 5798

https://gyazo.com/7742bc1428ac5adf84033dfc2ec29564
 

Attachments

  • frusciante.jpg
    frusciante.jpg
    13.7 KB · Views: 112
Last edited by a moderator:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Prove that $$\frac{ZP}{h_c}+\frac{ZQ}{h_a}+\frac{ZR}{h_b}=1$$. Then use the fact that $$(x+y+z)\left(\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{y}+\frac{1}{z}\right)\ge9$$ (proved with the help of the harmonic mean).
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
Prove that $$\frac{ZP}{h_c}+\frac{ZQ}{h_a}+\frac{ZR}{h_b}=1$$. Then use the fact that $$(x+y+z)\left(\frac{1}{x}+\frac{1}{y}+\frac{1}{z}\right)\ge9$$ (proved with the help of the harmonic mean).

Thank you for your response, Evgeny. Indeed that first expression (=1) must hold, but I am having a hard time to prove that $$\frac{ZP}{h_c}+\frac{ZQ}{h_a}+\frac{ZR}{h_b}=1$$ since the two "types" of distances (ZP - h_c etc) aren't parallel given that the triangle is not equilateral. Any idea?
 
frusciante said:
I am having a hard time to prove that $$\frac{ZP}{h_c}+\frac{ZQ}{h_a}+\frac{ZR}{h_b}=1$$ since the two "types" of distances (ZP - h_c etc) aren't parallel given that the triangle is not equilateral. Any idea?
I am not sure what you mean by parallel types of distances. The altitude from $C$ and $ZP$ are parallel since they are both perpendicular to $AB$. I suggest multiplying both $h_c$ and $ZP$ by $AB$ and using your observation about the sum of areas.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top