0
$\begingroup$

"Let $ABCD$ be a convex quadrilateral, and let $M$ and $N$ be the midpoints of sides $\overline{AD}$ and $\overline{BC}$, respectively. Prove that $MN$ <= $\frac{AB + CD}{2}$

My question is if $MN \leq MP + NP$ or if $MN < MP + NP$ by triangle $MNP$ inequality on triangle. The solution manual says that it is $MN \leq MP + NP$, but doesn't the triangle inequality state that $MN < MP + NP$ ?

Image of the convex quadrilateral: Convex Quadrilateral

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The triangle inequality is $MN \le MP + NP$ for any three general points. It is a constraint imposed on the distance function for any metric spaces. The inequality $MN < MP + NP$ is a different thing. It is a necessary condition for 3 points form a "non-degenerate" triangle in Euclidean geometry. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Sep 22 '13 at 2:13
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry I don't understand. $MN \leq MP + NP$ is for any three general points? How does what I have differ from a normal triangle? $\endgroup$ – Ozera Sep 22 '13 at 2:50
  • $\begingroup$ If $MN = MP+NP$, then the 3 points $M, N, P$ are collinear with $P$ lies between $M$ and $N$. The corresponding triangle "degenerate" into a "line segment". In your case, this will happen when your $ABCD$ is a trapezoid. Look at Calvin's answer again and think what happens when $ABCD$ is a trapezoid. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Sep 22 '13 at 3:02
  • $\begingroup$ From the picture, I see you are using Geogebra. Inside Geogebra, drag your point $B$ to a position such that $AB \parallel CD$ and observe what happens to the $\triangle MNP$. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Sep 22 '13 at 3:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Nope, a convex quadrilateral isn't defined like what you draw. In your picture, if you move $B$ vertically downward, your quadrilateral remains convex until it moves below the line $AC$. A geometric figure is convex iff it contains all line segments joining any two point of it. For planar polygons, this condition is equivalent to all internal angles are $\le 180^\circ$. $\endgroup$ – achille hui Sep 22 '13 at 3:45
1
$\begingroup$

The slight issue which you haven't addressed, is the position of point $P$. Here is the proof, and an explanation of why $P$ is important.

Let $P$ be the midpoint of diagonal $BD$. Then, we see that $MP$ is parallel to $AB$, and half of it. $NP$ is parallel to $CD$ and half of it.

Applying the triangle inequality to the points $M, N, P$, we get that

$$ MN \leq NP + PM = \frac{AB+CD}{2}.$$

Note that equality holds because it is possible for $MNP$ to be a straight line.

Under this scenario, we have $AB \parallel MN \parallel CD$, which is the case of a trapezoid. Conversely, it is clear to see that if $ABCD$ is a trapezoid, then $AB \parallel MN \parallel CD$ and hence $P$ lies on $MN$ so $MN = NP + PM$ and we do indeed have equality.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, here is the image I made with P defined. i.imgur.com/QmRlpQF.png $\endgroup$ – Ozera Sep 22 '13 at 2:33
  • $\begingroup$ @Ozera It's better to add that image to the question itself. $\endgroup$ – Calvin Lin Sep 22 '13 at 2:34
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, can you explain why AB || MN || CD ? and then why $P$ lies on $MN$? $\endgroup$ – Ozera Sep 22 '13 at 2:36
  • $\begingroup$ That is the equality case. We have $AB \parallel MP = PN \parallel CD$, where the 'equality' is in terms of lines. $\endgroup$ – Calvin Lin Sep 22 '13 at 2:37
  • $\begingroup$ Mmm..I think i'm misunderstanding. I don't see why you said "applying triangle inequality..." and then we get an inequality with a $\leq$ and not $<$. Isn't the triangle inequality with $<$? $\endgroup$ – Ozera Sep 22 '13 at 2:42

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.