Go back
The mystery of  an irregular  pentagon

The mystery of an irregular pentagon

Posers and Puzzles

3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

😲🙄🙄🙄

Vote Up
Vote Down

I've been working on this. Inside the pentagon are five line segments that each make up one side of one of the five triangles; AC, BD, CE, BE and AD. These line segments intersect with one another at five points, which we can name F, G, H, I and J.

Now each of the five triangles with area = x are subdivided into three triangles, and share one of the small triangles with the large triangle clockwise, and one small triangle is shared with the large triangle counterclockwise. Thus ABC might be split into ABF, AFG and ACG. BCD will also contain the small triangle ACG.

Thus we will get five equations of the form

ABF + BFG + BCG = x = ABC.

Another such equation would be

BCG + CGH + CDH = x = BCD

Both have BCG, so we can subtract the two to get

ABF + BFG - CGH - CDH = x


That's as far as I've gotten. This sort of thing can be done several more times with different pairs of triangles. This may lead to the answer.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Area of ABCDE is x * (5 + squareroot(5)) / 2
(Which is the same as LemonJello's answer - (2 + phi)x)

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
Area of ABCDE is x * (5 + squareroot(5)) / 2
(Which is the same as LemonJello's answer - (2 + phi)x)
How? Is that a conjecture? Remember ..it is not a regular pentagon..

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

To be honest I assumed that you were correct in saying that any pentagon with that property would have the same area and then worked out the area for a regular pentagon, which is easy. However even armed with the correct answer I couldn't prove it for the general case.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
To be honest I assumed that you were correct in saying that any pentagon with that property would have the same area and then worked out the area for a regular pentagon, which is easy. However even armed with the correct answer I couldn't prove it for the general case.
Aw man, your reply with the answer immediately made me feel kind of stupid. Glad you didn't work it out thoroughly after all.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
To be honest I assumed that you were correct in saying that any pentagon with that property would have the same area and then worked out the area for a regular pentagon, which is easy. However even armed with the correct answer I couldn't prove it for the general case.
I have never said so....Where has it been said that any pentagon with that property will have the same area?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Aw man, your reply with the answer immediately made me feel kind of stupid. Glad you didn't work it out thoroughly after all.
The assumption behind Fat Lady's answer is unfounded.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ranjan sinha
I have never said so....Where has it been said that any pentagon with that property will have the same area?
When I say "the same area" I mean cx, where x is the area of each of the five internal triangles defined by three consecutive vertices of the pentagon. If it is true that any such irregular pentagon will have area cx then it is also true for a regular pentagon, which is just a special case.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
When I say "the same area" I mean cx, where x is the area of each of the five internal triangles defined by three consecutive vertices of the pentagon. If it is true that any such irregular pentagon will have area cx then it is also true for a regular pentagon, which is just a special case.
You seem to be right in assuming the area of the pentagon being some constant times the area of each peripheral triangle. I had expressed the same view when I said that the area of the pentagon should be a linear function of x. It seems reasonable to assume that the area (of the pentagon) should be proportional to x from dimensional considerations too. But the constant of proportionality may vary with the shape. thus your constant "c" may be different for different possible irregular shapes with same x.

Vote Up
Vote Down

So if AB is parallel to EC and BC is parallel to AD, then we could call the intersection of AD and EC F, say, and the parallelogram ABCF would have area 2x. Then we just need to find the area of that tricky blighter FCD.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
So if AB is parallel to EC and BC is parallel to AD, then we could call the intersection of AD and EC F, say, and the parallelogram ABCF would have area 2x. Then we just need to find the area of that tricky blighter FCD.
Very true..Verily so..

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by howzzat
You seem to be right in assuming the area of the pentagon being some constant times the area of each peripheral triangle. I had expressed the same view when I said that the area of the pentagon should be a linear function of x. It seems reasonable to assume that the area (of the pentagon) should be proportional to x from dimensional considerations t ...[text shortened]... thus your constant "c" may be different for different possible irregular shapes with same x.
Right... you seem to be right.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
I've been working on this. Inside the pentagon are five line segments that each make up one side of one of the five triangles; AC, BD, CE, BE and AD. These line segments intersect with one another at five points, which we can name F, G, H, I and J.

Now each of the five triangles with area = x are subdivided into three triangles, and share one of ...[text shortened]... n be done several more times with different pairs of triangles. This may lead to the answer.
My math is faulty.

ABF + BFG + BCG = x
BCG + CGH + CDH = x

ABF + BFG - CGH - CDH = 0

Not = x.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Fat Lady
So if AB is parallel to EC and BC is parallel to AD, then we could call the intersection of AD and EC F, say, and the parallelogram ABCF would have area 2x. Then we just need to find the area of that tricky blighter FCD.
I have yet to see a proof that any two segments are parallel.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.