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

Given a triangle $\triangle ABM$ such that $|AM|=|BM|$ and a point $C$ such that the oriented angle $\angle ACB$ has twice the size of $\angle AMB=2$, show that $|CM|=|AM|$.

I am pretty sure that this must hold. Can somebody point me to an (elementary) proof?

share|cite|improve this question
The way your problem is stated, $C$ could be anywhere. Was it supposed to be on $BM$? – Karolis Juodelė Sep 8 '12 at 13:29
@KarolisJuodelė No. C can be anywhere but the constraint on the angle $\angle ACB$ must hold. – FUZxxl Sep 8 '12 at 13:30
@Karolis I fixed the error. My bad :-( – FUZxxl Sep 8 '12 at 13:34
up vote 1 down vote accepted

The circle around $M$ through $A$ (and $B$) intersects $BC$ in ($B$ and) $C'$. By the inscribed angle theorem, $2\angle AC'B=\angle AMB=2\angle ACB$, hence $AC'||AC$ (even though $\angle AC'B=\angle ACB+180^o$ is not excluded), hence $AC'=AC$ as line and $C'=C$ as intersection of that line with $BC$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Nice and easy. Thank you! – FUZxxl Sep 8 '12 at 14:28

The answer is no.

The inscribed angle theorem ensures that for any $C$ on the red arc below, $2\angle ACB=\angle AMB$. For those points, we have that $|CM|=|AM|$. However, by symmetry, for any $C$ on the green arc below, we also have $2\angle ACB=\angle AMB$, but for $C$ on that arc $|CM|>|AM|$ (except for $A$ and $B$).

$\hspace{1.5cm}$enter image description here

share|cite|improve this answer

The answer is no. There are two positions for $C$.

If $M$ and $C$ are on the same side of $AB$, $\angle ACM = \frac{1}{2}\angle C$ and $\angle CMA = \pi - \frac{1}{2} \angle AMB = \pi - \angle C$ and finally $\angle CAM = \pi - \angle ACM - \angle CMA = \frac{1}{2}\angle C$ and thus $\triangle AMC$ is isosceles and $CM = AM$ follows.

However, $C$ and $M$ could be on opposite sides of $AB$ (so that $AMBC$ is shaped like a kite). Then $CM = AM + 2MH$ where $MH$ is the height of $\triangle AMB$ as seen by folding $AMBC$ along $BC$ to get the first case.

share|cite|improve this answer
In the second case, the sign of the angle $\angle ACB$ is negative. The equation $2\angle ACB=\angle AMB$ does not holds if the signs do not match. – FUZxxl Sep 8 '12 at 14:27
@FUZxxl: if you had intended some orientation of angles, it would be nice to mention that. As it stands, I think the answer is no. – robjohn Sep 8 '12 at 14:37
I am sorry. I usually don't ignore the orientation of angles. I should've made that clear beforehand. – FUZxxl Sep 8 '12 at 16:33

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.