I asked a more general version of this question in an earlier question, [Regions on a sphere that avoid a fixed point set](https://mathoverflow.net/q/208230/6094). <hr /> <img src="https://i.sstatic.net/bLNKd.jpg" width="180" /> <br /> <sup> A $5$-point set, its convex hull (blue) and smallest enclosing circle (red). </sup> <hr /> The OP's version is an $8$-point set. An upperbound was proved: "for an $n$-point set $P$, the area of an avoiding set cannot be larger than $\frac{n-1}{n} A$, where $A$ is the area of the sphere." For $n=8$, this gives an upper bound of $\frac{7}{8}=0.875$ which is smaller than the OP's $0.9$. To address the OP's specific questions: > I want to know where this question originates from. My version was original, but ... > Is this question part of some general type of questions that are encountered in a more general setting? Yes, *avoiding sets*. For example, there is quite a bit of literature on *mutually avoiding sets*, going back to Erdős. There is also considerable literature on sets avoiding integral (or rational) distances. See, e.g., the question [Integer-distance sets](https://mathoverflow.net/q/136925/6094). Or: Kurz, Sascha, and Valery Mishkin. "[Open sets avoiding integral distances](https://arxiv.org/abs/1204.0403)." *Discrete & Computational Geometry* 50.1 (2013): 99-123.