Geometry Contruction - Bisect Areas of 2 Triangles

Source: Asked to me by Sankeerth Rao (EE IITB 4th year Student)

Problem:
Given any two triangles in a plane construct a line which bisects both their areas.

Background:
In fact the existence of such a line is true in a very general setting - for any two polygons in a plane there exists a line which bisects both their areas. In fact its true for any two Jordan measurable sets in a plane. Further generalized version is called the Ham Sandwich Theorem and is proved using Borsuk Ulam Theorem.


Solution:

Highlight the part between the * symbols for the answer.
* Key fact: in every direction there is a line that bisects a given triangle's area, and it moves continuously as the direction rotates. (For direction theta, sweep a line of that slope across the triangle; the area on one side goes continuously from 0 to the full area, so some position halves it - and the halving position varies continuously with theta.)

Now parameterize by angle theta in [0, pi): let L(theta) be the bisecting line of triangle 1 in direction theta, and let f(theta) = (area of triangle 2 on the left side of L(theta)) - (half the area of triangle 2). f is continuous, and rotating by pi swaps the two sides, so f(theta + pi) = -f(theta). By the intermediate value theorem some theta* has f(theta*) = 0: the line L(theta*) bisects both triangles.

For an explicit construction: a bisecting line of a triangle must cut two of its sides; requiring it to halve the area gives a quadratic condition on the cut point (the product of the two side-fractions is fixed), so the cut points - and hence the line - are constructible with straightedge and compass, and solving the same condition simultaneously for both triangles reduces to intersecting conics.

The same continuity argument works for any two polygons (or any two measurable sets) - the two-dimensional case of the Ham Sandwich Theorem.

Solution by Betzalel from the comments.
*

Comments

  1. the line through their centres of masses

    ReplyDelete
  2. Actually, ignore my last answer

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would use the following methodology.

    First, find any line that bisects the area of the first triangle. (Easy to do.) Then there is a point on this line such that if you rotate the line about this point, the area in the triangle on both sides of the line will always be equal.

    Next, if you rotate the line about this point, you'll at some point in time bisect the area of the second triangle.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. One approach to solve this problem is to find a solution by co-ordinate geometry and then try to back engineer the solution into a geometry solution..

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think it should be possible to solve this problem by a set of rotational and translational transformations superimposed on one another. How?? ... will have to be thought. But just a hunch.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Any line through the incenter of the triangle divides it into 2 parts with equal area (and perimeter too). This is not too difficult to prove.

    So, consider the line passing through the incenters of the given triangles.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Good retraction - for the record, the centroid line fails: a line through a triangle's centroid need not bisect i

    ReplyDelete
  15. The continuity idea is right but one step is off: rotating a bisecting line of T1 about a fixed point does not ke

    ReplyDelete
  16. Legit strategy - coordinates give you the IVT argument above concretely (parametrize bisectors of T1 by slope, so

    ReplyDelete
  17. The hunch has the right spirit - the existence proof is exactly "rotate the direction continuously, the bisector

    ReplyDelete
  18. Careful - that claim is false. Lines through the incenter do not generally bisect area (nor perimeter); try a ver

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Polya's Urn Problem: Expected Balls in the Smaller Urn

Lion and Man in a Circular Cage: Can the Lion Catch the Tamer?

Expected Tosses for Consecutive Heads: 2 Heads vs 3 Heads Puzzle