3 Orthogonal circles

Theorem 3.1. If two circles meet at P and Q, then the magnitude of the angles between the circles is the same at P and Q. Proof. Referring to the gure on the right, we have AP B AQB (by SSS), so AP B AQB . Since the tangents to the circles at P are perpendicular to the radii AP and BP , it follows that the angle between the tangents at P is equal in measure to m(AP B ). Likewise, the angle between the tangents at Q is equal in measure to m(AQB ).

P A Q B

Remark: The previous theorem means that to check the angle between two circles intersecting at P and Q, we only need to check one of the angles. Note however, that the directions of the angles at P and Q are opposite. Denition: Two intersecting circles and are said to be orthogonal if the angle between them is 90 . We sometimes write to indicate orthogonality. Theorem 3.2. If two circles and are orthogonal, then (1) The tangents at each point of intersection pass through the centres of the other circle. (Figure (a) below). (2) Each circle is its own inverse with respect to the other.

O P

(a)
Proof.

(b)

(1) This follows because a line through the point of tangency perpendicular to the tangent must pass through the centre of the circle. (2) Let P be a point on the circle . Join P to O, the centre of , and let r be the radius of . Let Q be the other point where the ray OP meets . Let T be the point of intersection of the two circles so that OT is the tangent to by part (1). By the power of the point O with respect to we have OP OQ = OT 2 = r2 , showing that the inverse of any point on is another point on .

The preceding theorem has the following converse: Theorem 3.3. Two intersecting circles and are orthogonal if any one of the following statements is true. (1) The tangents to one circle at one point of intersection passes through the centre of the other circle (Figure (a) below). (2) One of the circles passes through two distinct points that are inverses with respect to the other circle.

r O P

(a)
Proof.

(b)

(1) This implies that the two tangents at the point of intersection must be perpendicular. (2) Suppose that circle passes through P and Q that are inverses with respect to . Let O be the centre of and let OX be tangent to at X (see Figure (b)). Then OP OQ = OX 2 (by the power of O with respect to ) OP OQ = r2 (since P and Q are inverses).

This implies that OX = r, so X must be on as well as on . That is, X is a point of intersection of and , and the tangent to at this point passes through the centre of . By part (1), the circles must be orthogonal.

10

The Arbelos Theorem (Ogilvy, p. 54; Eves, p. 133)

Theorem 3.4. (The Arbelos Theorem a.k.a. Pappus Ancient Theorem). P , Q, and R are three collinear points with C , D, and K0 being semicircles on P Q. P R, and QR. Let K1 , K2 , . . ., be circles touching C and D with K1 touching K0 , K2 touching K1 and so on. Let hn be the distance of the centre of Kn from P R and let rn be the radius of Kn . Then hn = 2nrn .

D C

Kn

K2 K1

hn

K0 P Q R

Proof.

D C

Kn

K2 K1

K0 P Q R

Let t be the tangential distance from P to the circle Kn , and apply I (P, t2 ). Kn is orthogonal to the circle of inversion, so is its own inverse. C inverts into a line l. D inverts into a line m parallel to l. K0 inverts into a semicircle K0 tangent to l and m (because inversion preserves tangencies). Ki inverts into a circle Ki tangent to l and m. Then all of the Ki have the same radius, namely rn , and the theorem follows.

11

Steiners Porism (Ogilvy, p. 5154; Eves, p. 134, 135)

Given a point P outside a circle , a point X of is said to be visible from P if the segment P X meets only at X .

not visible from P

X visible from P P

(a)

(b )

Figure (b) above shows in red the set of points that are visible from P , namely the two tangent points and the points on the arc between the tangent points. In other words, a point X of is visible from P if and only if either P X is tangent to , or the tangent to at X has and P on opposite sides. Note also that if a line m is tangent to at X , and if P is on the same side of m as (but not on the line m), then X is not visible from P . Lemma 3.5. Suppose the line P Q misses the circle . Then (1) There is a point X visible from both P and Q. (2) There is a point Y visible from P but not from Q. (3) There is a point Z visible from Q but not from P . The gure below illustrates how to nd points X and Y : Let m be a line parallel to P Q and tangent to . X is the point of tangency of m with . There are two lines from P tangent to . Let l be the tangent line such that and Q are both on the same side of l. Then Y is the point where l is tangent to .

Y X P Q m

12

Lemma 3.6. Given two circles and , and given a point P not on either circle, then there is a circle through P orthogonal to both and . Proof.

P Q S U O U S

Q O

Let Q be the inverse of P with respect to . Let S be the inverse of P with respect to . Then there is a unique circle through P , Q, and S , and this circle must be orthogonal to both and by Theorem 3.3. Note: If O, U , and P are collinear, then the orthogonal circle is a line. If O, U , and P are not collinear, then the orthogonal circle is an true circle. Lemma 3.7. Let and be two non-intersecting circles with centres O and U , O = U . Then we can nd points X and Y that are inverses to each other with respect to both and . Proof. Let be any circle other than a line that is orthogonal to both and . We claim that the line OU intersects in two points. (Then the two points are X and Y and they are inverses to each other with respect to both and .)

Y U

U X

case (i)

case (ii)

There are two cases to consider: (i) when the circles are exterior to each other and (ii) when one circle is inside the other. (i) Suppose, for a contradiction, that OU misses . Then there is a point Z on that is visible from both O and U . Since Z is visible from O, it is inside or on . Since Z is visible from U , it is inside or on . Then Z is inside or on both and , which contradicts the fact that and are exterior to each other. This proves case (i). (ii) Left as an exercise.

13

Denition. Let and be two non-intersecting circles. Let 1 be a circle tangent to both and . Let 2 be a circle tangent to 1 , , and . Let 3 be a circle tangent to 2 , , and . Continue in this fashion. If at some point k is tangent to 1 we say that 1 , 2 , . . . , k is a Steiner chain of k circles.

Remark: Given two circles and , there is no guarantee that a Steiner chain exists for and . Theorem 3.8. (Steiners Porism.) Suppose that the two non-intersecting circles and have a Steiner chain of k circles. Then, any circle tangent to and is a member of some Steiner chain of k circles. To prove this theorem, we need the following: Lemma 3.9. Given two non-intersecting circles and (that are not concentric), there is an inversion that transforms them into concentric circles. Proof. Using Lemma 3.6 we can nd two circles and simultaneously orthogonal to both and . These two circles intersect at points X and Y referred to in Lemma 3.7.
' ' '
Y'

'

Perform the inversion I (X, r2 ) for some radius r. Then transforms to (a straight line through Y and not through X ). transforms to (a straight line through Y and not through X ). transforms to a circle , and , (because orthogonality is preserved). transforms to a circle , and , . Since the circle is orthogonal to the line , then must be centred at some point of . Similarly, must be centred at some point of . Thus, is centred at Y . By the same argument, must also be centred at Y .

14

Proof of Steiners Porism.

' '

Invert and into concentric circles. The inversion preserves the Steiner chain of k circles.

' '
Using the same inversion, transform into a circle '.

'

The circle ' is obviously part of a Steiner chain of k circles, so by the reverse inversion must also be part of a Steiner chain of k circles.

15