The following is a geometry problem that I came across with in the course of a research project.

Consider a ray starting at some initial point $t$. Place point $s_1$ at distance $r$ from $t$ on the ray and draw a circle centered at $s_1$ that passes through $t$. Likewise, centered at $t$, an arc with radius $r$ goes through $s_1$. Let $\mathcal{A_1}$ be the area enclosed between the intersecting arcs.

Next, arbitrarily place another point somewhere on the free end of the ray and call it $s_2$ such that $|s_1 - t| < |s_2 - t|$, where $|.|$ denotes the Euclidean distance. A circle with radius $r$ is centered at $s_2$ and another arc centered at $t$ goes through $s_2$. The area enclosed between these intersecting arcs we call $\mathcal{A}_2$. It is easy to show that $\mathcal{A}_1 < \mathcal{A}_2 < \lim_{|s_2 - t| \to \infty} \mathcal{A}_2 = \frac{1}{2} \pi r^2$.

Now, assume that we mark the segments of the ray within the enclosed areas in the middle and arcs centered at $t$ pass through the marks segmenting $\mathcal{A}_1$ and $\mathcal{A}_2$. We call these segmented areas $\mathcal{A}_{11}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{12}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{21}$ and $\mathcal{A}_{22}$ as depicted below (dashed lines are the arcs centered at $t$).

enter image description here

Question: How does $\mathcal{A}_{22}$ change as $s_2$ gets farther from $t$? (i.e., does it increase or decrease?) What can we say about $\mathcal{A}_{22}$ in comparison with $\mathcal{A}_{12}$?

Any idea or comment is much appreciated.

EDIT: The question has been edited in a way that makes the comments incomprehensible. Please see the edit history if you want to make sense of the comments.

EDIT: Here is the link to the same question at mathoverflow.net

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do you have numeric evidence that $A_{12}>A_{22}$. Intuitively, I would reason: If we move $s_1$ a bit farther right, $A_{11}$ would shrink to a point and $A_{12}$ would be a circle of radius $\frac r2$, whose area is definitely less than that of $A_{22}$. It looks unintuitive to me that the area of the $A_{\cdot 2}$ would be increasing from $s_2$ to $s_1$ only suddenly decrease to the right of $s_1$. $\endgroup$ – hmakholm left over Monica Jun 20 '12 at 23:50
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the comment, @HenningMakholm. The fact is that $s_1$ is a fixed point at distance $r$ from $t$ and $s_2$ is the only point that we arbitrarily choose. In other words, we are not allowed to move $s_1$. Regarding your question on the numerical evidence, I should say no. In fact, I do not know any way to numerically evaluate these regions. Whatever I said is just based on my intuition and of course I am not sure of its correctness. $\endgroup$ – Ali Jun 20 '12 at 23:59
  • $\begingroup$ Who says we're not allowed to imagine $s_1$ being somewhere else? But if that bothers you, just put an $s_0$ half a unit to the right of $s_1$ instead, and consider how unlikely it seems that $A_{02}<A_{22}<A_{12}$. $\endgroup$ – hmakholm left over Monica Jun 21 '12 at 0:03
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Before you decide on the implications, better check the facts. If $A_{22}\gt A_{12}$ as $s_2\to\infty$, then that will prove that there is some finite place where $A_{22}\gt A_{12}$. In other words, this is an attempt to prove that the conjecture is wrong. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jun 21 '12 at 2:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Ali, please edit in a link to the identical question posted at MathOverflow, and please edit in a link to this question over there. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jun 21 '12 at 5:36

The shape of $A_1$ is always the same, so we can calculate its area as the sum of two circular segments: $A_1 = r^2(2\pi/3 - \sqrt{3}/2)$.

Let's first let $t$ be the origin (why the hell would you name the origin of a ray $t$?!). Let's set $r=1$, keeping in mind all areas will be scaled by $r^2$ later. The coordinates of the vertices of $A_{11}$ are $(1/8,\pm \sqrt{15}/8)$, and the subtended angles are $2\tan^{-1} \sqrt{15}$ and $2\tan^{-1} \sqrt{15}/7$. This then gives $A_{11} \approx 0.350767 (r^2)$, $A_{1} \approx 1.22837$, and $A_{12} \approx 0.877603$. Note that all these numbers can be made precise; they're just huge ugly expressions, and remember they are multiplied by $r^2$.

Now let $s_2$ be located at coordinates $(R,0)$ where $R > 1$ according to our assumptions. By similar reasoning, the vertices of $A_2$ are $(\frac{2R^2-1}{2R},\pm \sqrt{1-\frac{1}{4R^2}})$. Similarly now, we can compute $A_{22}$. The expression for $A_{22}/A_{12}$ is horrendously large, so I will just have Mathematica plot it as a function of $R$:

enter image description here

The limit according to Mathematica is $1.09003$.

Edit: I have corrected a number of mistakes. Now, the area ratio is always greater than unity for $R>1$.

  • $\begingroup$ I should just like to add that numerically evaluating the areas is extremely simple as the sum of circular segments, and can even be done in a numerically robust way when the segments are thin slivers. For C code, see the function CircularSectorArea in this file $\endgroup$ – Victor Liu Jun 21 '12 at 5:22
  • $\begingroup$ Nice. Is it true that $A_{22}\gt A_{12}$ for all values of $R$? $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jun 21 '12 at 5:44
  • $\begingroup$ No. The plot clearly shows that it crosses over the area of $A_{12}$. Mathematica says this happens around $R=9.23574$. $\endgroup$ – Victor Liu Jun 21 '12 at 5:48
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. The plot doesn't show this, unless you put in a horizontal line, labeled, at $A_{12}$ and the plot extends below this line. $\endgroup$ – Gerry Myerson Jun 21 '12 at 7:33
  • $\begingroup$ @VictorLiu: How can that be? If we set $R=1$, then $A_{22}$ and $A_{12}$ coincide. Are there two $R$ values that give the same $A_{22}$ area? $\endgroup$ – hmakholm left over Monica Jun 21 '12 at 10:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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