m 2 + m n + n 2 m + n = 4 9 4
If m and n are positive integers satisfy the equation above, find m + n .
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.
Nice solution. (+1)... Just to complete it... Equality occurs when m = 1 0 , n = 6 or vice versa..
Nice solution!
why is k > 3??
Log in to reply
By solving 1 6 k 2 − 4 9 k > 0 with k being a positive integer
@Aditya, shouldn't it be 2 2 ( m + n ) 2 − m n ?
Nice solution!! Upvoted. I got the first inequality k > 3 and then I just put k = 4 , and it worked. I didn't think of the other one. That step for the 2nd inequality is really nice!! :) :D
How did you get m 2 + m n + n 2 = 4 9 k ??. Please explain .
Log in to reply
he set m + n = 4 k so the expression became m 2 + m n + n 2 4 k = 4 9 4
Let x = g cd ( m , n ) . We can rewrite using m = a x and n = b x for some relatively prime integers a and b .
The fraction becomes:
( a x ) 2 + ( a x ) ( b x ) + ( b x ) 2 a x + b x = 4 9 4
x ∗ ( a 2 + a b + b 2 ) a + b = 4 9 4
Now, since a and b are relatively prime, g cd ( a + b , a 2 + a b + b 2 ) = g cd ( a + b , ( a + b ) 2 − a b ) = g cd ( a + b , a b ) = 1 .
Thus 4 ∣ ( a + b ) and ( a 2 + a b + b 2 ) ∣ 4 9 .
Clearly, since a and b are positive integers, a 2 + a b + b 2 = 1 . Furthermore, a 2 + a b + b 2 = 7 gives a = 1 and b = 2 (or vice versa), which does not satisfy 4 ∣ ( a + b ) . So a 2 + a b + b 2 = 4 9 . In turn, we must have a + b = 8 .
Plugging back into the original fraction gives 4 9 x 8 = 4 9 4 and x = 2 .
Finally, the question asks for m + n = ( a + b ) ∗ x = 8 ∗ 2 = 1 6 .
How do we know that four is factor of a+b and 49 is a factor of (a^2)+ab+(b^2)? Furthermore how did you find out that a+b is 5 from a^2+ab+b^2? By the way nice solution..
Log in to reply
Puneet,
Good questions.
I debated fleshing those points out more, as they're the biggest leaps I didn't address, but I didn't want to speak down to anyone.
Regarding the factor issues:
The fraction is equal to 4 9 4 , but aside from x the fraction on the left does not reduce. So, in particular, the 4 we need in the numerator must come entirely from the a + b term in the numerator on the other side. So a + b must be a multiple of 4. Note that a + b may also contain other factors, which can be canceled by x .
Conversely, there is nothing to cancel any factors from the a 2 + a b + b 2 denominator on the other side, though the x in the denominator may contain any factors we're missing to get to 4 9 . So the a 2 + a b + b 2 term must not contain any factor beyond those of 4 9 .
That wasn't incredibly formalized, and I might tighten it up formally later on, but I hope it helps.
Regarding a + b = 8 :
This can largely be done by inspection; a + b ≤ 4 isn't nearly large enough, whereas a + b ≥ 1 2 is much too large. But let's be a little more rigorous:
For positive integers a and b and given that a 2 + a b + b 2 = 4 9 ,
2 a 2 + a b + 2 b 2 < a 2 + a b + b 2 < a 2 + 2 a b + b 2
2 ( a + b ) 2 < 4 9 < ( a + b ) 2
2 a + b < 7 < a + b
a + b > 7 and a + b < 7 2 ≈ 9 . 9 .
Thus a + b = 8 .
Note: An analogous approach can be used to prove that a 2 + a b + b 2 = 7 does not work.
Log in to reply
Thank you very much Antony Ritz. I too had same shade of idea but wasn't too clear. Now that you have given the same reasons I have understood it properly. Initially I thought you got that 8 by hit and trial method. I tried it too and got values as 3&5 and hence their sum was eight. But now I see there is a formal reasoning behind it. Thankyou..by the way did you solve the equation completely on your own...?
Log in to reply
@Puneet Pinku – Yes, I solved it on my own. Why do you ask?
Log in to reply
@Anthony Ritz – I have only seen teachers give such king of amazing solutions
Log in to reply
@Puneet Pinku – It's funny you mention it; you caught me. I'm actually a teacher. I own a tutoring company here in Washington, DC. I mostly do graduate-level test prep, but that includes a decent amount of math. I'm also a former math major and math competition participant at a national level. So my background is definitely working with and conveying this sort of material.
I'm still figuring out how to calibrate my explanations for this audience, and honestly a lot of the hardest questions are over my head at present, but I really appreciate the kind words on my explanation.
I used Python to solve this question:
Once the program was ran it yielded:
6 + 1 0 is 1 6 therefore, the answer is 1 6
How can we show that there are no further solutions?
brilliant man, never thought of doing such problems with programming found a new way.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Assume that m + n = 4 k for a positive integer k . Therefore, we have m 2 + m n + n 2 = 4 9 k .
Now, m 2 + 2 m n + n 2 = ( m + n ) 2 = 1 6 k 2 .
Hence, m n = 1 6 k 2 − 4 9 k
Since, m n > 0 , we can say that k > 3 .
m n = ( 2 m + n ) 2 − ( 2 m − n ) 2
We have: ( 2 m − n ) 2 ≥ 0 .
By AM-GM, we have: ( 2 m + n ) 2 − m n = ( 2 4 k ) 2 − ( 1 6 k 2 − 4 9 k ) ≥ 0
From this, we get: k ≤ 4
Hence, k = 4 .
Hence m + n = 1 6 .
The equality occurs when m = 1 0 , n = 6 or vice versa.