Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The problem:

Three poles standing at the points $A$, $B$ and $C$ subtend angles $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\gamma$ respectively, at the circumcenter of $\Delta ABC$.If the heights of these poles are in arithmetic progression; then show that $\cot \alpha$, $\cot \beta$ and $\cot \gamma $ are in harmonic progression.

Now, what I could not understand is subtending of the angle part,precisely how a point subtends angle at another point? So, what I am looking for a proper explanation of the problem statement with a figure, since it's troubling me from sometime.

PS: I am not looking for the solution (as of now) or any hint regarding the solution, just a clear explanation will be appreciated.

My solution using Moron's interpretation,

Let $a$ $b$ and $c$ are the length of three sides of the poles and $O$ be the circumcenter then, $$ \cot \alpha = \frac{OA}{a}$$ $$ \cot \beta = \frac{OB}{b}$$

$$ \cot \gamma = \frac{OC}{c}$$

As $O$ is the circumcenter,$OA = OB = OC = k $(say)

Again, $a$ $b$ and $c$ are in arithmetic progression, hence

$$2 \cdot \frac{k}{\cot \alpha} = \frac{k}{\cot \beta} + \frac{k}{\cot \gamma}$$

Canceling $k$ from both sides,

$$2 \cdot \frac{1}{\cot \alpha} = \frac{1}{\cot \beta} + \frac{1}{\cot \gamma}$$

Hence, $\cot \alpha$, $\cot \beta$ and $\cot \gamma $ are in harmonic progression. (QED)

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

My guess is the poles are of (different) heights $h_A$, $h_B$, $h_C$ and the angle is from the foot of pole to the circumcentre of $\triangle ABC$ to the top of the pole.

share|cite|improve this answer
Aha .. Do you meant the $3D$ angle? – Quixotic Dec 3 '10 at 18:17
@Deb: Yes 3D, seems to make sense when talking about poles and angle subtended. – Aryabhata Dec 3 '10 at 18:40
Well,your guess is bang on! I solved the problem using your interpretation. :) – Quixotic Dec 4 '10 at 7:19
@Deb: Glad that worked :-) – Aryabhata Dec 4 '10 at 7:25
@Deb: Yes, there is something wrong. Your question states "angles of poles are in arithmetic progression", while in the solution you are assuming that the heights of the poles are in arithmetic progression. – Aryabhata Dec 4 '10 at 7:33

I would read it that the poles have a diameter>0. The pole at A has diameter so the angle seen from the circumcenter is $\alpha$. See if that works.

share|cite|improve this answer
I think Moron's interpretation and mine will lead to the same answer. They just work in orthogonal axes. – Ross Millikan Dec 3 '10 at 17:34

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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