Can you provide another proof for the claim given below?

Claim. In any triangle $\triangle ABC$ construct triangles $\triangle ACE$ and $\triangle BDC$ on sides $AC$ and $BC$ such that $\frac{AE}{AC}=\frac{BD}{BC}$ and $\angle EAC+\angle CBD=180^{\circ}$ hold true. Let points $F$ and $G$ divide sides $AE$ and $BD$ respectively in the same arbitrary ratio . The midpoint $H$ of the line segment that connects points $F$ and $G$ is independent of the location of $C$ .

enter image description here

Proof.(Complex numbers) Consider $A$, $B$ , $C$ as complex numbers and choose a $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$. Denote $\angle EAC=\alpha$ , $\angle CBD=\beta$ and $\frac{AE}{AC}=\frac{BD}{BC}=k$ . Then, $$F=A+\lambda(E-A)=A+\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha +i \sin \alpha)(C-A)$$ $$G=B+\lambda(D-B)=B+\lambda \cdot k(\cos (-\beta) +i \sin (-\beta))(C-B)$$ $$H=\frac{1}{2}(F+G)=\frac{1}{2}(A+\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha +i \sin \alpha)(C-A)+$$$$B+\lambda \cdot k(-\cos \alpha -i \sin \alpha)(C-B))=$$ $$\frac{1}{2}(A+\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha)C-\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha)A+$$$$B-\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha)C+\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha)B)=$$ $$\frac{1}{2}(A(1-\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha))+B(1+\lambda \cdot k(\cos \alpha + i\sin \alpha)))$$ This shows that $H$ is independent of the location of $C$.


The GeoGebra applet that demonstrates this claim can be found here.


This is essentially the same proof but it is a bit simplified and provides a more precise statement. We suppose that $A=0$, $B=1$, $C=z$. Then $E=\rho e^{i\alpha} z$ and $D=1+\rho e^{i\beta}(z-1)$ (so we are making no a priori assumptions about the swing angles). Then $F=\lambda \rho z e^{i\alpha}$ and $G=\lambda \rho ze^{-i\beta}$ plus a term which is constant (i.e., independent of $z$) and so irrelevant in this context. By the way, replacing $E$ and $D$ by $F$ and $G$ is a red herring.

From this we immediately get the following refined version. The midpoint $H$ is independent of $z$ if and only if the swing angles are related as in the OP. One can also extend to the case where $H$ is a suitable point on the perpendicular bisector of $FG$ and this version is sharp (i.e., it only holds for such points on the bisector).


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.