1
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

In the figure, G and H are the circum-center and the orthocenter of ⊿ABC respectively. AH produced meets BC at O. GR ┴ BC at R. BS is the diameter of the circumscribed circle. Show that B, O, H, and G are not concyclic.

The derived facts are (1) AHCS is a parallelogram: and (2) AH = 2GR.

My questions are:

(1) Fact #1 helps, but does fact #2 also help?

(2) Does “if they are concyclic, then BH = HS ……” help?

(3) I can prove it, in a clumsy way, through angle-chasing. Would like to see if there is a more elegant proof.

$\endgroup$
7
  • $\begingroup$ If $B$, $O$, $H$, $G$ were concyclic, then $\angle HGB$ would have to be a right angle (in order to be supplementary to $\angle HOB$). So, can you prove that $HG$ is not perpendicular to $BS$? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ Note that if the triangle is equilateral, then $G$ and $H$ coincide; in that case, $B$, $O$, $H$, $G$ are concyclic. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 6:02
  • $\begingroup$ @Blue (1) About your 2nd comment, I think the proof is not that direct. (2) For your 1st comment, I have thought about it, but not successful. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 7:03
  • $\begingroup$ @Blue What I can do is to show that angle GHA is, somehow, larger than angle GBO. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 7:05
  • $\begingroup$ Write $T$ for the foot of the perpendicular from $C$ to $AB$. We certainly have concyclic $B$, $O$, $H$, $T$, say on circle $\gamma$. ($BH$ is diameter of $\gamma$.) Fixing $B$ & $C$ to make a central angle of at least $90^\circ$, move $A$ along the circumcircle. When $\angle ABC = 90^\circ$, circle $\gamma$ collapses to a pt at $B$; pt $G$ clearly lies outside this circle. As $A$ moves toward $S$, circle $\gamma$ grows; pt $G$ lies inside the circle $\gamma$ when $A=S$. By continuity, there's a location for $A$ such that $G$ lies on $\gamma$. We can't prove non-concyclicity in general. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 7:06

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Elaborating on my comment ...


Consider $B$ and $C$ fixed, with $\angle BGC \geq 90^\circ$, so that $\angle A \geq 45^\circ$. Let $T$ be the foot of the perpendicular from $C$ to $AB$. Note that $B$, $O$, $H$, $T$ are concyclic (since opposite angles at $O$ and $T$ are supplementary); call the circle $\gamma$.

For $A$ such that $\angle ABC \approx 90^\circ$, circle $\gamma$ is nearly a point-circle at $B$. Circumcenter $G$ lies outside $\gamma$.

enter image description here

For $A$ close to $S$, circle $\gamma$ pass through a point of $\overline{GS}$ (in fact, $\gamma$ contains $G$ itself, when $\angle A = 45^\circ$ and $A=S$). Circumcenter $G$ lies inside $\gamma$.

enter image description here

By continuity, we can position $A$ such that $G$ lies on $\gamma$.

enter image description here

Therefore, the assertion that $B$, $O$, $H$, $G$ are non-concyclic is false, in general.


We can be precise about this.

Let $G^\prime$ be the foot of the perpendicular from $H$ to $\overline{BS}$. Certainly, $B$, $O$, $H$, $G^\prime$ are concyclic; moreover, $B$, $O$, $H$, $G$ will be concyclic if and only if $G=G^\prime$.

enter image description here

Writing $d := |\overline{BS}|$ for the circumdiameter, we have $$\begin{align} |BG| &= \frac{1}{2}d \\[6pt] |BG^\prime| &= |BH| \;\cos\angle HBG^\prime \\ &= |BH|\;\cos(\angle CBS - \angle CBG) \\ &= |BH|\;\cos((90^\circ - A)-(90^\circ-C)) \\ &= |BH|\;\cos(C-A) \end{align}$$

(With appropriate adjustment when $C-A > 90^\circ$.)

Now, as I pointed out recently in this answer, vertex-to-orthocenter lengths obey a Law-of-Sines-like relation, but with cosines; here, in particular, we have $|BH| = d\;|\cos B|$.

Therefore, $$\begin{align} G = G^\prime \qquad&\Leftrightarrow\qquad |\overline{BG}| = |\overline{BG^\prime}| \\ &\Leftrightarrow\qquad \frac{1}{2}d = d\;|\cos B|\;\cos(C-A) \\[6pt] &\Leftrightarrow\qquad 1 = 2\;|\;\cos(C+A)\;\cos(C-A)\;| \\[6pt] &\Leftrightarrow\qquad 1 = |\;\cos 2A + \cos 2C\;| \qquad (\star) \end{align}$$

We can see that condition $(\star)$ holds in some special cases I've mentioned: $(1)$ equilateral $\triangle ABC$ (ie, $A=B=C=60^\circ$), and $(2)$ $A=S$ (ie, $C=90^\circ$) with $A=45^\circ$.

Thus, there are plenty of triangles for which the four points in question are concyclic; and there are plenty of triangles for which the points are non-concyclic.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I am posted mine. Please see if it is ok. Your final finding could be correct too. It probably depends on where A is. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 11:01
0
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

To simplify the explanation, I have the angles labeled.

My proof is by the following contradiction.

If GBOH is a cyclic quadrilateral, then

k + h = p … [ext. angle of ‘cyclic quad’.]

= q … [angles in the same seg.]

= r … [alt. angles AS// HC]

∴ k + h + s = r + s

But h = r + s … [ext. angle of triangle]

∴ k + s = 0 which is impossible (unless TC on the other side of G)

[The ’unless’ part can be forced to not going to happen if A is located even closer to S.]

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ This argument is clever for what it does, but you effectively come to this conclusion: The statement is true, unless it's not. That's not terribly insightful. :) There's nothing in your question that suggests $TC$ could not be "on the other side of $G$", so by avoiding this possibility, you leave a huge hole in your argument. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 15, 2014 at 11:18

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.