It's straightforward to show that if quadrilateral $ABCD$ has its vertices lying on a common circle, then its opposite angles complement one another. enter image description here

That is $\angle DAB + \angle DCB =\angle ADC + \angle ABC=\pi$

Is this condition sufficient for $ABCD$ to be cyclic?

If we draw a circumcircle to the $\Delta ABC$ and pick a point $X$ on the arc $AC$ such that $AXCB$ is a quadrilateral whose sides do not intersect, then by necessary condition, we immediately have $\beta = \pi-\alpha$. We also know that $\gamma =\pi -\alpha$.

Is it necessary for $D$ to lie on the common circle with $X$ in order for $\beta = \gamma$?

So, assume for a contradiction $D$ does not lie on the circumcircle, it's either outside or inside.

enter image description here

How does one make progress? I read everywhere that these conditions are equivalent, but haven't found a proof to the converse


Let $DC$ intersects our circle in the points $E$ and $C$.

Thus, $\measuredangle AEC=180^{\circ}-\alpha=\measuredangle D$, which is contradiction because $\measuredangle AEC>\measuredangle D$.

By the same way we can get a contradiction if $D$ placed inside the circle.

  • $\begingroup$ smacks forehead , it's so obvious :( even more obvious than the forward implication $\endgroup$ – Alvin Lepik May 29 '17 at 11:47

We know that $\hat{B}+\hat{D}=\pi$ and want to prove that $D$ is on the circle.

By contradiction, suppose $D$ is not a point of the circle, for instance it's outside the circle. Connect $D$ with the centre $O$ and call $E$ the intersection of $OD$ with the circle. Quadrilateral $ABCE$ is inscribed in the circle therefore $\hat{E}$ is supplementary of $\hat{B}$. Now consider triangles $CED$ and $AED$. The external angles are $\alpha>\beta$ and $\gamma>\delta$ thus $\alpha +\gamma>\beta+\delta$ while $\alpha +\gamma=\hat{E}\cong \hat{D}=\beta+\delta$ being $\hat{D}\cong \hat{E}$ because they are supplementary of $\hat{B}$. Contradiction.

In a similar way we get a contradiction if $D$ is internal. Must be $\beta >\alpha$ while we have shown that $\alpha=\beta$. Again contradiction.

If $D$ is on a line tangent to the circle we have just a particular case of the first case, so there is nothing more to say.

The hypothesis that $D$ is not on the circle lead to contradictions so $D$ lies on the circle.


enter image description here

enter image description here

  • $\begingroup$ @kulisty Come and see my proof :) $\endgroup$ – Raffaele Oct 9 '17 at 14:16
  • $\begingroup$ There is exactly the same problem in your proof as in the previous one. How do you know that point $E$ doesn't lie on the opposite side of $AC$ ? i.stack.imgur.com/NaSZc.png $\endgroup$ – Kulisty Oct 9 '17 at 17:10
  • $\begingroup$ If this happens then point $C$ must be elsewhere because $C$ and $A$ are supplementary and cannot be both obtuse. So we can take the intersection of $DC$ with circle as point $E$ and go on with the proof as before imgur.com/nPRfI39 $\endgroup$ – Raffaele Oct 9 '17 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry but I don't quite get your argument (although I think it's correct). One of the angles $A$ and $C$ (say $C$) is not obtuse. How does it imply that $CD$ intersects the circle in $E$ in such way that $E$ is between $C$ and $D$ ? $\endgroup$ – Kulisty Oct 9 '17 at 18:39
  • $\begingroup$ @Kulisty Honestly I used GeoGebra when I realized this fact. Now it's late and I am tired, but I don't think it is difficult to prove. Anyway I would have been honoured to have a student like you attending my classes: very smart observations! I wish I had more students like you! $\endgroup$ – Raffaele Oct 9 '17 at 18:45

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.