⎩ ⎪ ⎨ ⎪ ⎧ x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 4 1 x 3 + y 3 + z 3 = 6 1
How many real solutions ( x , y , z ) does the system above have?
This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try
refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and,
finally, (c)
loading the
non-javascript version of this page
. We're sorry about the hassle.
I didn't understand the last two lines Why is 1 -3/2x more than 1/4? Couldn't 1-3/2y be negative?
Log in to reply
It follows from the bound on x, y and z that they are less or equal than 1/2.
We know x is in the range [-0.5, 0.5], so 1-(3/2)x will be in the range [0.25, 1.75]. A negative value for x makes 1 - (3/2)x greater, not lesser.
How can you say that x,y,z <1/2? May be one of them is 1/2 and rest two are 0.
Log in to reply
Yeah you are right! There shuld be <= sign instead
From the comments I think some people didn't follow your last line. Allow me to expand it a bit.
We know x^{2}(1 - \frac{3}{2}) >= 0. Same for the y-based and z-based terms. If three non-negative terms add to zero, they must each equal zero. If x^{2} times a positive quantity is zero, the x^{2} is zero and x is zero. Same for y,z. This contradicts x^{2} + y^{2} + z^{2} = \frac{1}{4}, so there can be no solution.
All I did was look at it, mentally explore a few possibilities through my mind, then figured it to be 0. No extensive math included.
Taking the double of each unknown shows that the sum of their sqares is 1, while the sum of the cubes is 8/6, i. e. greater than 1. This is absurd, since a higher power of a number below unity is smaller.
You have to be careful about that argument.
For example, it is possible that x 3 + y 3 + z 3 = 1 and x 4 + y 4 + z 4 = 8 / 6 . There is a bit more going on here that isn't written in your solution as yet.
Log in to reply
Sure, cubes can be also negative, sqares cannot. But I thought I can leave out the obvious. Give readership some credit.
Log in to reply
Right, that's the difference.
In general, it's better to be explicit with the details, then hoping that every single reader can fill in the gaps.
To build on Paul Gartner's solution:
Consider the transformation ( t , u , v ) = 2 ∗ ( x , y , z ) . Then t 2 + u 2 + v 2 = 1 and t 3 + u 3 + v 3 = 3 4 . The first equation here implies that all the variables are of magnitude at most 1, and thus ∣ t ∣ 3 ≤ ∣ t ∣ 2 , and ∣ u ∣ 3 ≤ ∣ u ∣ 2 and ∣ v ∣ 3 ≤ ∣ v ∣ 2 .
This gives us the chain of inequalities:
∣ t 3 + u 3 + v 3 ∣ ≤ ∣ t 3 ∣ + ∣ u 3 ∣ + ∣ v 3 ∣ ≤ ∣ t ∣ 2 + ∣ u ∣ 2 + ∣ v ∣ 2 = t 2 + u 2 + v 2 = 1
The first inequality is because ∣ a + b ∣ ≤ ∣ a ∣ + ∣ b ∣ for all real numbers a , b . The second inequality is because the magnitudes of all the variables is bounded by 1. The absolute value signs may be removed because squaring the numbers makes them all non-negative.
In conclusion ∣ t 3 + u 3 + v 3 ∣ ≤ 1 < 4 / 3 , meaning no solution is possible.
Suppose, for contradiction, that v = ( x , y , z ) ∈ R 3 such that the system is satisfied by x,y,z. Then, ∣ ∣ v ∣ ∣ 2 = 4 − 2 1 = 2 1 , ∣ ∣ v ∣ ∣ 3 = 6 − 3 1 by the definition of the L p norms. Hence, ∣ ∣ v ∣ ∣ 3 ≤ ∣ ∣ v ∣ ∣ 2 by the basic properties of L p norms. On the other hand, 6 − 3 1 > 2 1 . This is a contradiction. Hence, no such vector solves the system; the system has no solutions.
x 3 + y 3 + z 3 = 6 1
x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 4 1
Multiply the first equation by 2 3 to get 2 3 ( x 3 + y 3 + z 3 ) = 4 1 .
So x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 2 3 ( x 3 + y 3 + z 3 ) = 4 1 .
Now rewrite like 2 3 x × x 2 + 2 3 y × y 2 + 2 3 z × z 2 = x 2 + y 2 + z 2 .
We see that x = y = z = 3 2 which does not satisfy the system.
This solution makes a common error. Can you find it?
Hint: Check out this misconception wiki page .
You need to be careful with this approach since I am not convinced that the last line follows from the previous one.
Log in to reply
For example it has a solution ( 1 , 1 , − 0 . 6 9 8 7 5 )
How not? All 3x/2, 3y/2, 3z/s need to be 1.
Log in to reply
Not necessairly since you don't make functions equal you look for specific numerical solutions. Some overflow from x can go to z and everything will even out.
Log in to reply
@Robert Szafarczyk – Don't getcha bro.
Log in to reply
@A Former Brilliant Member – I just try to justify why you cannot imply that 2 3 x = 1 just by looking at the previous equation
Log in to reply
@Robert Szafarczyk – @Daniel Stone Put another way, suppose that for some fixed values of x , y , z , we have x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = a x 2 + b y 2 + c z 2 , must it be true that a = b = c = 1 ?
What's happening here is that you are confusing the concept of
x
as a variable vs
x
as a constant.
IE If we had the equality
x
=
a
x
holds true for all values of
x
, then we can conclude that
a
=
1
.
However, if we had to solve the equation
x
=
a
x
for a specific value of
x
, then we cannot conclude that
a
=
1
. In fact, we can only conclude that " If
a
=
1
, then
x
=
0
".
@Robert Szafarczyk – @Calvin Lin Could you help us here?
@Calvin Lin Is it because I equated squares with cubes and could therefore be equating a positive value to a negative value?
Log in to reply
That's a possible interpretation, depending on how you interpret it.
Essentially what you are saying is that if
a
+
b
+
c
=
A
+
B
+
C
, then we must have
a
=
A
,
b
=
B
,
c
=
C
.
Yes, these variables have some relationship to them.
However, it is still not true that if
f
(
a
)
+
f
(
b
)
+
f
(
c
)
=
g
(
a
)
+
g
(
b
)
+
g
(
c
)
, then
f
(
a
)
=
g
(
a
)
,
f
(
b
)
=
g
(
b
)
,
f
(
c
)
=
g
(
c
)
.
Ok. So I am wrong in saying that the coefficients 3x/2, 3y/2, and 3z/2 of the left side sum of squares are equal to the coeffiecients of 1 in the sum of squares in the right side. Gotcha. Thanks!!!
Shows no real roots
Such a great solution. Love it :)
Amazing solution my friend! :D
Let {x = a, y = b, z = c} by a solution. Then { x = a, y = c, z = b} would also be a solution. This implies the number of triplets be a multiple of 3!. The only possible answer given the choices is 0.
Your argument fails if x=y=\=z is a solution I think.
Log in to reply
Indeed. Furthermore, x = y = z will yield only 1 solution, so we cannot even conclude that the number of solutions is a multiple of 3.
As an example, x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 0 only has 1 solution over the reals.
They are a pair of concentric spheres with different radios, so, there is not interception.
My fault,I read the coefficients in a wrong way. Downvote to myself
This is not correct; only one of the graphs is of a sphere. Here are what the two looked like when graphed together:
x³+y³+z³=k doesn't represent a sphere
There should be an option to downvote factually incorrect 'solutions'
Log in to reply
This would result in chaos on some of the basic level problems.
I have manually changed the votes and added a picture.
The second equation is not a sphere. However plotting the two surfaces (using e.g. mathematica) looks very cool, and you can see the neat way that the 3D cubic wraps itself partly around the sphere.
This is obviously incorrect but somehow you've managed to end up with the right answer. Well played my friend.
one is a sphere, and the another one es a 3d hiperbolic toroid?, if there existed intersection, it would be some kind of closed pseudo-ellipse, or in some limit case, at most 8 points of tangency (one in each 3d semi-space , around cero) , in which case, the answer would be, cero or eight
Another way of graphing it - looking at a cross section between z=-0.5 and z=0.5
https://www.desmos.com/calculator/yuzyncbnor
We can solve it by it's geometric meaning. So, the answer is just the number of these 2 graphs' intersections.
The first equation stands for a spherical surface, whose radius equals 2 1 , it's highly symmetrical. :)
The second equation is also symmetrical, which means, if you found a solution/point ( x 0 , y 0 , z 0 ) in octant I (where x > 0 , y > 0 a n d z > 0 ) , just rotate it 2 times through the line x = y = z , and you will get another 2 solutions, they are ( y 0 , z 0 , x 0 ) and ( z 0 , x 0 , y 0 ) . (only when that point does not belong to the line).
So the answer can be divided by 3! without remainder.
Assume that x = y = z = 6 3 , this does not satisfy the second equation.
The only choice is zero. XD
First equation is the equation of the surface of a sphere of diameter 1. The second equation is the equation of the VOLUME of a sphere of cubic root radius of 1/6, smaller than the radius of the surface : no contact between the volume and the surface ; no solution.
In a 3D graphing program, solid modeller or other such, create the 0.5 radius sphere. This is the set of points which solver the first equation. Then model the surface over the range |x|<0.5 and |y|<0.5 of z = (1/6 - x^3 -y^3)^(1/3). Then explore in 3D. You can see the surface never gets to touch or intersect the sphere.
By graphing both equations, you can see that there is no intersection. Check it out!
First equation is of eqa of sphere of radius 1/2 . To have a solution of given system of equations, we need second curve should cut the sphere at some place. From second equation, highest value of x(y=z=0) = cube root of 1/6 << 1/2 radius of sphere. So, there is no real solution for this system of equations
Maybe I misunderstood your solution but 3 6 1 = 0 . 5 5 0 3 . . . > 0 . 5 .
Hm, that just says that when y = z = 0 , there is no real solution. Why does that imply otherwise?
E.g. The system x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 4 1 , x 3 + 1 0 0 y 3 + 1 0 0 z 3 = 6 1 has a real solution.
Log in to reply
I think he just miscalculated 3 6 1 . If it was less than 2 1 this solution would be valid because the shape of the second equation would be inside the sphere not touching the surface.
Log in to reply
Quite the opposite. If we had we indeed had "cube root of X less than 1/2", then we would have a real solution to this problem. This follows by considering the point inside the sphere and a point outside the sphere (with similar signage as the original point) and knowing that there is a continuous line that connects them, hence must intersect the sphere at some point in time.
On the other hand, knowing that "cube root of 1/6 is more than 1/2" doesn't yet explain why there is no real solution to this problem.
My comment is asking for him to clarify why "finding the higher value of x can tell us if there is no real solution".
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin – Yes you are right. I've got mixed-up because of this misinformation.
This solution it's acutally simple, i just didn't skiped any step.
x 2 + y 2 + z 3 = 4 1
x 3 + y 3 + z 3 = 6 1
Sum up two equations and we end with R H S = 5 / 1 2
Then, i put in evidence the common factors x 2 , y 2 , z 2 (on L H S )
x 2 ( 1 + x ) + y 2 ( 1 + y ) + z 2 ( 1 + z ) = 1 2 5 = 4 1 × 3 5 = ( x 2 + y 2 + z 2 ) ( 3 5 ) = x 2 3 5 + y 2 3 5 + z 2 3 5
now looking by the simmetry of the equation we do have that
( 1 + x ) = ( 1 + y ) = ( 1 + z ) = 3 5
So
x = y = z
But there's no solution for the system :
3 x 2 = 4 1
3 x 3 = 6 1
So the actual answer is 0 ... not 1 as we first get by looking at x = y = z = 3 2
This solution makes a common error. Can you find it?
Hint: Check out this misconception wiki page .
To your solution I have the same doubt as to Daniel Stone's one. I don't think that the equation you get implies that ( 1 + x ) = ( 1 + y ) = ( 1 + z ) = 3 5
Probably not recommended, but since first equation is sum of squares, each positive solution can be replaced with negative. This implies an even number of solution.
But that wouldn't satisfy the second equation because negative cubed is negative. Nice attempt at breaking the system though!
Not true for several reasons.
Here's my approach: Every system of equations with n variables needs n variables to be solved. If this is not the case, the system has either infinite solutions or no solutions.
That claim is not true for a system of equations. For example, x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 0 has only 1 solution in the real numbers, namely x = y = z = 0 .
You are thinking of a system of linear equations, in which case, a necessary condition for having a unique solution is that there are n equations and n variables.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
From the first equation we get that x , y , z < 2 1 .
x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 2 3 × 6 1 = 2 3 ( x 3 + y 3 + z 3 )
Therefore x 2 ( 1 − 2 3 x ) + y 2 ( 1 − 2 3 y ) + z 2 ( 1 − 2 3 z ) = 0
But 1 − 2 3 x > 1 − 4 3 = 4 1
Therefore x 2 ( 1 − 2 3 x ) is greater than 0 or equal to 0 but x 2 ( 1 − 2 3 x ) + y 2 ( 1 − 2 3 y ) + z 2 ( 1 − 2 3 z ) = 0 so x 2 ( 1 − 2 3 x ) = 0 and this means x = 0 , y = 0 , z = 0 which is not a solution.