Circumradius of a perturbed equilateral triangle
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Consider an equilateral triangle $ABC$ with side lengths 1, on the picture with its circumcircle outlined. Its circumradius will be $1/sqrt{3}$.
Now imagine we allow each vertex to move within a disc of radius $rho$ centered at that vertex. We end up with a new triangle $A'B'C'$, where e.g. $A' in B(A,rho)$, the disc with center $A$ and radius $rho$.
The question is simple:
What is the maximum circumradius of the perturbed triangle $A'B'C'$?
According to Existence of Gibbsian point processes with geometry-dependent interactions (though I wouldn't recommend looking through the paper for any insights, as it deals with a completely different topic and gives no details on this problem) the maximum circumradius, for $rho leq sqrt 3 /6$, is
$$1/sqrt{3} + rho$$
Which is a very simple solution, but though it intuitively makes some sense to me, I can't really convince myself of it or prove it. It also leads to a secondary question
What happens at $rho = sqrt3/6$? How does the solution change for $rho > sqrt3 / 6$?
Intuitively what I think happens is that for small enough $rho$ the solution is still an equilateral triangle but after a certain point (probably $rho = sqrt 3/6$) this is no longer the case, as moving the points closer to collinearity will yield a greater circumradius, until finally at $rho = sqrt3/4$ the points can become collinear.
geometry trigonometry euclidean-geometry triangle
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Consider an equilateral triangle $ABC$ with side lengths 1, on the picture with its circumcircle outlined. Its circumradius will be $1/sqrt{3}$.
Now imagine we allow each vertex to move within a disc of radius $rho$ centered at that vertex. We end up with a new triangle $A'B'C'$, where e.g. $A' in B(A,rho)$, the disc with center $A$ and radius $rho$.
The question is simple:
What is the maximum circumradius of the perturbed triangle $A'B'C'$?
According to Existence of Gibbsian point processes with geometry-dependent interactions (though I wouldn't recommend looking through the paper for any insights, as it deals with a completely different topic and gives no details on this problem) the maximum circumradius, for $rho leq sqrt 3 /6$, is
$$1/sqrt{3} + rho$$
Which is a very simple solution, but though it intuitively makes some sense to me, I can't really convince myself of it or prove it. It also leads to a secondary question
What happens at $rho = sqrt3/6$? How does the solution change for $rho > sqrt3 / 6$?
Intuitively what I think happens is that for small enough $rho$ the solution is still an equilateral triangle but after a certain point (probably $rho = sqrt 3/6$) this is no longer the case, as moving the points closer to collinearity will yield a greater circumradius, until finally at $rho = sqrt3/4$ the points can become collinear.
geometry trigonometry euclidean-geometry triangle
add a comment |
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
up vote
6
down vote
favorite
Consider an equilateral triangle $ABC$ with side lengths 1, on the picture with its circumcircle outlined. Its circumradius will be $1/sqrt{3}$.
Now imagine we allow each vertex to move within a disc of radius $rho$ centered at that vertex. We end up with a new triangle $A'B'C'$, where e.g. $A' in B(A,rho)$, the disc with center $A$ and radius $rho$.
The question is simple:
What is the maximum circumradius of the perturbed triangle $A'B'C'$?
According to Existence of Gibbsian point processes with geometry-dependent interactions (though I wouldn't recommend looking through the paper for any insights, as it deals with a completely different topic and gives no details on this problem) the maximum circumradius, for $rho leq sqrt 3 /6$, is
$$1/sqrt{3} + rho$$
Which is a very simple solution, but though it intuitively makes some sense to me, I can't really convince myself of it or prove it. It also leads to a secondary question
What happens at $rho = sqrt3/6$? How does the solution change for $rho > sqrt3 / 6$?
Intuitively what I think happens is that for small enough $rho$ the solution is still an equilateral triangle but after a certain point (probably $rho = sqrt 3/6$) this is no longer the case, as moving the points closer to collinearity will yield a greater circumradius, until finally at $rho = sqrt3/4$ the points can become collinear.
geometry trigonometry euclidean-geometry triangle
Consider an equilateral triangle $ABC$ with side lengths 1, on the picture with its circumcircle outlined. Its circumradius will be $1/sqrt{3}$.
Now imagine we allow each vertex to move within a disc of radius $rho$ centered at that vertex. We end up with a new triangle $A'B'C'$, where e.g. $A' in B(A,rho)$, the disc with center $A$ and radius $rho$.
The question is simple:
What is the maximum circumradius of the perturbed triangle $A'B'C'$?
According to Existence of Gibbsian point processes with geometry-dependent interactions (though I wouldn't recommend looking through the paper for any insights, as it deals with a completely different topic and gives no details on this problem) the maximum circumradius, for $rho leq sqrt 3 /6$, is
$$1/sqrt{3} + rho$$
Which is a very simple solution, but though it intuitively makes some sense to me, I can't really convince myself of it or prove it. It also leads to a secondary question
What happens at $rho = sqrt3/6$? How does the solution change for $rho > sqrt3 / 6$?
Intuitively what I think happens is that for small enough $rho$ the solution is still an equilateral triangle but after a certain point (probably $rho = sqrt 3/6$) this is no longer the case, as moving the points closer to collinearity will yield a greater circumradius, until finally at $rho = sqrt3/4$ the points can become collinear.
geometry trigonometry euclidean-geometry triangle
geometry trigonometry euclidean-geometry triangle
edited Nov 17 at 13:55
asked Nov 17 at 11:02
Dahn Jahn
2,34811836
2,34811836
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Why the circumradius is maximised when all three perturbed points are on the boundary of the small circles
Suppose the small circles are disjoint, there is no line intersecting all three circles, points $A'$ and $B'$ are fixed and $C'$ is not on the boundary of its circle (i.e. it has a neighbourhood within the circle around $C$). The circumradius is a differentiable, non-constant function of the coordinates of $C'$. Thus there must be some perturbation of $C'$, within the aforementioned neighbourhood, that increases the circumradius – there are no local extrema to impede this modification because the level sets of the circumradius function can only be as small as the circle with diameter $A'B'$, whereas arbitrarily small level sets can be drawn around a local extremum.
Thus the circumradius can only be maximised when $A',B',C'$ are all on the boundaries of their circles, at which point the circumcircle is tangent to all three small circles.
Now the problem boils down to determining which of two such circles – $Gamma_3$ internally tangent to all three small circles, or $Gamma_2$ internally tangent to only two – is larger:
(It can be easily shown that the corresponding $Gamma_1$ and $Gamma_0$ are never larger than $Gamma_3$; we choose the vertices of $triangle A'B'C'$ as the points of tangency.) It is easy to show that $r(Gamma_3)=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$, since it is concentric with the original equilateral triangle, which has circumradius $frac1{sqrt3}$. To determine the radius of $Gamma_2$, we draw another diagram:
From this we derive the equation
$$frac{sqrt3}2-rho+k-rho=sqrt{frac14+k^2}$$
$$(k+sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=k^2+(sqrt3-4rho)k+(sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=frac14+k^2$$
$$(sqrt3-4rho)k+frac34-2sqrt3rho+4rho^2=frac14$$
$$k=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
$$r(Gamma_2)=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}+frac{sqrt3}2-rho=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
Now where is this greater than $r(Gamma_3)$?
$$frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$$
$$1-sqrt3rho=(1/sqrt3+rho)(sqrt3-4rho)=1-4/sqrt3rho+sqrt3rho-4rho^2$$
$$4sqrt3rho^2-2rho=0qquadrho=frac{sqrt3}6$$
Thus, above this critical value $Gamma_2$ is larger and vice versa.
The vertical asymptote of $r(Gamma_2)=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$ comes at $rho=frac{sqrt3}4$; at and above this value we can choose three collinear points.
Thus the maximum circumradius of $triangle A'B'C'$ is
$$begin{cases}frac1{sqrt3}+rho&rho<frac{sqrt3}6\
frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}&frac{sqrt3}6lerho<frac{sqrt3}4\
infty&rhogefrac{sqrt3}4end{cases}$$
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
|
show 4 more comments
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Why the circumradius is maximised when all three perturbed points are on the boundary of the small circles
Suppose the small circles are disjoint, there is no line intersecting all three circles, points $A'$ and $B'$ are fixed and $C'$ is not on the boundary of its circle (i.e. it has a neighbourhood within the circle around $C$). The circumradius is a differentiable, non-constant function of the coordinates of $C'$. Thus there must be some perturbation of $C'$, within the aforementioned neighbourhood, that increases the circumradius – there are no local extrema to impede this modification because the level sets of the circumradius function can only be as small as the circle with diameter $A'B'$, whereas arbitrarily small level sets can be drawn around a local extremum.
Thus the circumradius can only be maximised when $A',B',C'$ are all on the boundaries of their circles, at which point the circumcircle is tangent to all three small circles.
Now the problem boils down to determining which of two such circles – $Gamma_3$ internally tangent to all three small circles, or $Gamma_2$ internally tangent to only two – is larger:
(It can be easily shown that the corresponding $Gamma_1$ and $Gamma_0$ are never larger than $Gamma_3$; we choose the vertices of $triangle A'B'C'$ as the points of tangency.) It is easy to show that $r(Gamma_3)=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$, since it is concentric with the original equilateral triangle, which has circumradius $frac1{sqrt3}$. To determine the radius of $Gamma_2$, we draw another diagram:
From this we derive the equation
$$frac{sqrt3}2-rho+k-rho=sqrt{frac14+k^2}$$
$$(k+sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=k^2+(sqrt3-4rho)k+(sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=frac14+k^2$$
$$(sqrt3-4rho)k+frac34-2sqrt3rho+4rho^2=frac14$$
$$k=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
$$r(Gamma_2)=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}+frac{sqrt3}2-rho=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
Now where is this greater than $r(Gamma_3)$?
$$frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$$
$$1-sqrt3rho=(1/sqrt3+rho)(sqrt3-4rho)=1-4/sqrt3rho+sqrt3rho-4rho^2$$
$$4sqrt3rho^2-2rho=0qquadrho=frac{sqrt3}6$$
Thus, above this critical value $Gamma_2$ is larger and vice versa.
The vertical asymptote of $r(Gamma_2)=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$ comes at $rho=frac{sqrt3}4$; at and above this value we can choose three collinear points.
Thus the maximum circumradius of $triangle A'B'C'$ is
$$begin{cases}frac1{sqrt3}+rho&rho<frac{sqrt3}6\
frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}&frac{sqrt3}6lerho<frac{sqrt3}4\
infty&rhogefrac{sqrt3}4end{cases}$$
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
|
show 4 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Why the circumradius is maximised when all three perturbed points are on the boundary of the small circles
Suppose the small circles are disjoint, there is no line intersecting all three circles, points $A'$ and $B'$ are fixed and $C'$ is not on the boundary of its circle (i.e. it has a neighbourhood within the circle around $C$). The circumradius is a differentiable, non-constant function of the coordinates of $C'$. Thus there must be some perturbation of $C'$, within the aforementioned neighbourhood, that increases the circumradius – there are no local extrema to impede this modification because the level sets of the circumradius function can only be as small as the circle with diameter $A'B'$, whereas arbitrarily small level sets can be drawn around a local extremum.
Thus the circumradius can only be maximised when $A',B',C'$ are all on the boundaries of their circles, at which point the circumcircle is tangent to all three small circles.
Now the problem boils down to determining which of two such circles – $Gamma_3$ internally tangent to all three small circles, or $Gamma_2$ internally tangent to only two – is larger:
(It can be easily shown that the corresponding $Gamma_1$ and $Gamma_0$ are never larger than $Gamma_3$; we choose the vertices of $triangle A'B'C'$ as the points of tangency.) It is easy to show that $r(Gamma_3)=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$, since it is concentric with the original equilateral triangle, which has circumradius $frac1{sqrt3}$. To determine the radius of $Gamma_2$, we draw another diagram:
From this we derive the equation
$$frac{sqrt3}2-rho+k-rho=sqrt{frac14+k^2}$$
$$(k+sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=k^2+(sqrt3-4rho)k+(sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=frac14+k^2$$
$$(sqrt3-4rho)k+frac34-2sqrt3rho+4rho^2=frac14$$
$$k=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
$$r(Gamma_2)=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}+frac{sqrt3}2-rho=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
Now where is this greater than $r(Gamma_3)$?
$$frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$$
$$1-sqrt3rho=(1/sqrt3+rho)(sqrt3-4rho)=1-4/sqrt3rho+sqrt3rho-4rho^2$$
$$4sqrt3rho^2-2rho=0qquadrho=frac{sqrt3}6$$
Thus, above this critical value $Gamma_2$ is larger and vice versa.
The vertical asymptote of $r(Gamma_2)=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$ comes at $rho=frac{sqrt3}4$; at and above this value we can choose three collinear points.
Thus the maximum circumradius of $triangle A'B'C'$ is
$$begin{cases}frac1{sqrt3}+rho&rho<frac{sqrt3}6\
frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}&frac{sqrt3}6lerho<frac{sqrt3}4\
infty&rhogefrac{sqrt3}4end{cases}$$
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
|
show 4 more comments
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
up vote
2
down vote
accepted
Why the circumradius is maximised when all three perturbed points are on the boundary of the small circles
Suppose the small circles are disjoint, there is no line intersecting all three circles, points $A'$ and $B'$ are fixed and $C'$ is not on the boundary of its circle (i.e. it has a neighbourhood within the circle around $C$). The circumradius is a differentiable, non-constant function of the coordinates of $C'$. Thus there must be some perturbation of $C'$, within the aforementioned neighbourhood, that increases the circumradius – there are no local extrema to impede this modification because the level sets of the circumradius function can only be as small as the circle with diameter $A'B'$, whereas arbitrarily small level sets can be drawn around a local extremum.
Thus the circumradius can only be maximised when $A',B',C'$ are all on the boundaries of their circles, at which point the circumcircle is tangent to all three small circles.
Now the problem boils down to determining which of two such circles – $Gamma_3$ internally tangent to all three small circles, or $Gamma_2$ internally tangent to only two – is larger:
(It can be easily shown that the corresponding $Gamma_1$ and $Gamma_0$ are never larger than $Gamma_3$; we choose the vertices of $triangle A'B'C'$ as the points of tangency.) It is easy to show that $r(Gamma_3)=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$, since it is concentric with the original equilateral triangle, which has circumradius $frac1{sqrt3}$. To determine the radius of $Gamma_2$, we draw another diagram:
From this we derive the equation
$$frac{sqrt3}2-rho+k-rho=sqrt{frac14+k^2}$$
$$(k+sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=k^2+(sqrt3-4rho)k+(sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=frac14+k^2$$
$$(sqrt3-4rho)k+frac34-2sqrt3rho+4rho^2=frac14$$
$$k=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
$$r(Gamma_2)=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}+frac{sqrt3}2-rho=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
Now where is this greater than $r(Gamma_3)$?
$$frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$$
$$1-sqrt3rho=(1/sqrt3+rho)(sqrt3-4rho)=1-4/sqrt3rho+sqrt3rho-4rho^2$$
$$4sqrt3rho^2-2rho=0qquadrho=frac{sqrt3}6$$
Thus, above this critical value $Gamma_2$ is larger and vice versa.
The vertical asymptote of $r(Gamma_2)=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$ comes at $rho=frac{sqrt3}4$; at and above this value we can choose three collinear points.
Thus the maximum circumradius of $triangle A'B'C'$ is
$$begin{cases}frac1{sqrt3}+rho&rho<frac{sqrt3}6\
frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}&frac{sqrt3}6lerho<frac{sqrt3}4\
infty&rhogefrac{sqrt3}4end{cases}$$
Why the circumradius is maximised when all three perturbed points are on the boundary of the small circles
Suppose the small circles are disjoint, there is no line intersecting all three circles, points $A'$ and $B'$ are fixed and $C'$ is not on the boundary of its circle (i.e. it has a neighbourhood within the circle around $C$). The circumradius is a differentiable, non-constant function of the coordinates of $C'$. Thus there must be some perturbation of $C'$, within the aforementioned neighbourhood, that increases the circumradius – there are no local extrema to impede this modification because the level sets of the circumradius function can only be as small as the circle with diameter $A'B'$, whereas arbitrarily small level sets can be drawn around a local extremum.
Thus the circumradius can only be maximised when $A',B',C'$ are all on the boundaries of their circles, at which point the circumcircle is tangent to all three small circles.
Now the problem boils down to determining which of two such circles – $Gamma_3$ internally tangent to all three small circles, or $Gamma_2$ internally tangent to only two – is larger:
(It can be easily shown that the corresponding $Gamma_1$ and $Gamma_0$ are never larger than $Gamma_3$; we choose the vertices of $triangle A'B'C'$ as the points of tangency.) It is easy to show that $r(Gamma_3)=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$, since it is concentric with the original equilateral triangle, which has circumradius $frac1{sqrt3}$. To determine the radius of $Gamma_2$, we draw another diagram:
From this we derive the equation
$$frac{sqrt3}2-rho+k-rho=sqrt{frac14+k^2}$$
$$(k+sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=k^2+(sqrt3-4rho)k+(sqrt3/2-2rho)^2=frac14+k^2$$
$$(sqrt3-4rho)k+frac34-2sqrt3rho+4rho^2=frac14$$
$$k=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
$$r(Gamma_2)=frac{-frac12+2sqrt3rho-4rho^2}{sqrt3-4rho}+frac{sqrt3}2-rho=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$$
Now where is this greater than $r(Gamma_3)$?
$$frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}=frac1{sqrt3}+rho$$
$$1-sqrt3rho=(1/sqrt3+rho)(sqrt3-4rho)=1-4/sqrt3rho+sqrt3rho-4rho^2$$
$$4sqrt3rho^2-2rho=0qquadrho=frac{sqrt3}6$$
Thus, above this critical value $Gamma_2$ is larger and vice versa.
The vertical asymptote of $r(Gamma_2)=frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}$ comes at $rho=frac{sqrt3}4$; at and above this value we can choose three collinear points.
Thus the maximum circumradius of $triangle A'B'C'$ is
$$begin{cases}frac1{sqrt3}+rho&rho<frac{sqrt3}6\
frac{1-sqrt3rho}{sqrt3-4rho}&frac{sqrt3}6lerho<frac{sqrt3}4\
infty&rhogefrac{sqrt3}4end{cases}$$
edited Nov 17 at 18:33
answered Nov 17 at 11:42
Parcly Taxel
41k137198
41k137198
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
|
show 4 more comments
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Thank you, I'm almost there. I don't quite understand the definition of $Gamma_i$s. For instance, is $Gamma_2$ any circle that is internally tangent to two of the circles (and can cross, rather than be tangent to, the third)? If that's the case, then surely I can make e.g. $r(Gamma_0)$ arbitrarily close to $r(Gamma_i)$ for any $i$.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:50
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
Ah, this lead me to a mistake I made - I mistook a disc for a circle. I edited the question accordingly. I am guessing the solution doesn't change, as the points maximizing the circumradius will still lie on the circles, but is there a simple argument as to why that's true? Sorry for the confusion.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 13:58
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I see how this shows that (Solution is internally tangent to 2) $Rightarrow$ (Solution is tangent to all 3), but I don't understand how this shows that the maximizing solution cannot have points on the interior in general.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:18
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
I am having trouble understanding this. Could you elaborate, perhaps even as a part of the post for completeness? Thank you.
– Dahn Jahn
Nov 17 at 14:44
1
1
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
@DahnJahn The level sets of the circumradius function are circles themselves, passing through $A',B'$. These circles cannot get smaller than the diameter $A'B'$. If there was a local extremum, we could draw an arbitrarily small level set around it, but we just showed that the level sets are lower-bounded in size, so there is no local extremum.
– Parcly Taxel
Nov 17 at 18:26
|
show 4 more comments
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3002217%2fcircumradius-of-a-perturbed-equilateral-triangle%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown