Which of the following numbers is larger? ( 1 0 1 ) 5 0 or 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0
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.
Great usage of the Binomial theorem to prove the inequality :)
Same way I did it.
I did it a little different: since the exponents are the same and it is only to compare each result, I simplified to a lower power to do an easy math: 101^2 = 10201 and 100^2 = 10000 + 99^2 = 9801 thus 100^2 + 99^2 = 19801 thus larger than 10201. As long as all exponents are the same, it does not matter if I use 50, 2 or 10000, the larger will always be the larger, so I believe that 100^50 + 99^50 is larger than 101^50 and it seams logical to me, but my math isn't so advanced as yours, and I can be wrong, or not?!
Log in to reply
you claimed that 100^2 + 99^2 > 101^2 is true, so that means that 100^50 + 99^50 > 101^50 is also true.
By your logic, 4^2 + 5^2 > 6^2, so 4^100 + 5^100 > 6^100, which is clearly wrong.
Claim: 1 < 1 . 0 1 5 0 − 0 . 9 9 5 0 .
We use the binomial theorem: ( 1 + x ) 5 0 = 1 + ( 1 5 0 ) x + ( 2 5 0 ) x 2 + ( 3 5 0 ) x 3 + …
With
x
=
0
.
0
1
, we see that
1
.
0
1
5
0
=
1
+
(
1
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
+
(
2
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
2
+
(
3
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
3
+
…
.
With
x
=
−
0
.
0
1
, we see that
0
.
9
9
5
0
=
1
−
(
1
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
+
(
2
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
2
−
(
3
5
0
)
×
0
.
0
1
3
+
…
.
Subtracting these 2 equations, we get that
1 . 0 1 5 0 − 0 . 9 9 5 0 = 2 × ( 1 5 0 ) × 0 . 0 1 + 2 × ( 3 5 0 ) × 0 . 0 1 3 + 2 × ( 5 5 0 ) × 0 . 0 1 5 … > 1 + … > 1 .
Multiplying throughout by 1 0 0 5 0 , we see that 9 9 5 0 + 1 0 0 5 0 < 1 0 1 5 0 .
99^4+100^4>101^4. What is the minimum value of power n for which 99^n+100^n<101^n holds.
Log in to reply
Look at Pi Han's approach, which offers a simple way of directly approaching it.
Once you figured it out, can you post it as a problem to the community?
Hey both of the fractions (101/100)^50 and (99/100)^50 ar about 0.605. Adding them is > 1. %0 isn't big enough.
Log in to reply
Can you clarify what you intended to say? I disagree that " (101/100)^50 is about 0.605", and I do not understand why you want to "adding them is > 1".
To be more specific, we want to show that ( 1 . 0 1 ) 5 0 − ( 0 . 9 9 ) 5 0 > 1 . This follows by either making the partial approximation (as hinted in the solution), or subtracting the equations directly (which I will now add).
As it turns out, we have 1 . 0 1 5 0 ≈ 1 . 6 4 5 and 0 . 9 9 5 0 ≈ 0 . 6 0 5 .
Right answer but x = ± 0.01 not ± 0.1 (4th & 5th line)
We can determine which number is the larger of the two by dividing one by the other. Recall that b a < 1 if a < b .
Using the same principle:
1 0 1 5 0 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0 = ( 1 0 1 1 0 0 ) 5 0 + ( 1 0 1 9 9 ) 5 0 < 1
Since 1 0 0 < 1 0 1 and 9 9 < 1 0 1 , we know these two fractions are less than 1, respectively. Furthermore, we can be certain the summation of the two fractions is also less than 1 because lim x → ∞ a x → 0 if a < 1 (and 50 is a relatively large power). Therefore, our denominator must be larger than our numerator: 1 0 1 5 0 > 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0 .
This solution is not valid. Can you spot the error in the reasoning?
The observation that the limit of LHS is 0 proves nothing for any particular n. Claiming 50 to be "a relatively large power" does not help; if it really is, then perhaps 48 can be also assumed to be "relatively large". The inequality, however, does not hold. The result just happened to be right, but it was rather a fluke.
Also, the sum of the fractions is actually just below 1 (greater than 0.97), so the claim of 50 being relatively large is just guessing.
Indeed, the break-even point is merely 48.22752430…
100^(50) + 99^(50) < 100^(50) + 100^(50) = 2x(100^(50)) < 100x(100^(50)) =100^(51) More precisely 100^(50) + 99^(50) is much less then 2% of 100^(51); so way smaller.
The Physicist's way of "solving" this :) The error is, as pointed out by others, the "relatively large" part: you need to actually make sure that 50 is big enough.
The whole idea of picking a number and saying its large is flawed.
According to Moderator, this solution is "not valid." apparently, however, it is sound. The conclusion is true, even though the conclusion may not be a logical consequence of the premises.
Regarding the moderator note:
Is the error "a/b < 1 if a<b? "
a= -3 b= -1
a<b , however, -3/-1 = 3 , 3>1
100^50+100^50=2 100^50, which is less than 100 100^50 (or 101^50)
99^50 is less than 100^50, therefore
100^50+99^50 is less than 101^50
101^50=(100+1)^50 =100^50+100×100^49+....+1 =100^50+100^50+...+1 So
101^50 > 100^50+99^50
This solution has a calculation error. The coefficient of 100^49 should be 50, not 100.
Note that 1 0 1 5 0 < 2 × 1 0 0 5 0 .
Karthi Jayapal: How did you get 100^50+100(100^49) for the first two terms of the binomial expansion of (100+1)^50? Should not the second term be 50(100^49)(1^1) since its corresponding coefficient would be 50C1?
What a clean solution! Nice.
We suppose 101^50>100^50+99^50. Dividing for 99^50 we obtain (101/99)^50-(100/99)^50>1 that is true so 101^50>100^50+99^50.
you are not explaining why you can claim "that is true" for the inequality!
I used the Log and Antilog table to find the approx value of both the terms and then compared them.
First of all, we will find the approx value of 1 0 1 5 0 ,
So,
lo g 1 0 1 5 0 = lo g x 5 0 lo g 1 0 1 = lo g x ⇒ lo g 1 0 1 = 2 . 0 0 4 3 5 0 × 2 . 0 0 4 3 = lo g x 1 0 0 . 2 1 5 = lo g x
Now we will find the Antilog of this,
x = antilog 0 . 2 1 5
(with 1 0 0 as the characteristic)
We get value as 1 6 4 1 and after putting the characteristic we get the approx value as,
1 6 4 1 0 0 0 … 0 0 0
(with total 1 0 1 digits)
Now we will find the approx value of 9 9 5 0 with the same procedure which comes out to be
6 0 2 6 0 0 0 … 0 0 0
(with total 1 0 0 digits)
And 1 0 0 5 0 = 1 0 0 0 0 0 … 0 0 0 0
(with 1 0 1 digits )
So the approx value of 2 n d expression is
1 6 0 2 6 0 0 0 … 0 0 0
(with 1 0 1 digits)
So by comparing the approx value of both,
1 0 1 5 0 > 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0
Can you show your working ?
Show the steps please
101²=10201, 100²+99²=10000+9801=19801 ,what's true about given problem
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 |
|
100^(50) + 99^(50) < 100^(50) + 100^(50) = 2x(100^(50)) < 100x(100^(50)) =100^(51) More precisely 100^(50) + 99^(50) is much less then 2% of 100^(51); so way smaller.
Don’t we want to compare it to 101^50, and not 100^51 ?
We can rule out the equality by Fermat's Last Theorem.
Good observation
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We want to find the mathematical symbol satisfying the inequation/equation below.
1 0 1 5 0 = ? 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0
Notice that 9 9 = 1 0 0 − 1 and 1 0 1 = 1 0 0 + 1 , by binomial theorem expansions , we can show that for a > b > 0 , and n > 0 , all the terms of ( a + b ) n − ( a − b ) n is strictly positive. In this case, a = 1 0 0 , b = 1 .
1 0 1 5 0 − 9 9 5 0 = = 0 = 0 = = > ( 1 0 0 + 1 ) 5 0 − ( 1 0 0 − 1 ) 5 0 ( 1 0 0 5 0 + 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ( 2 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 4 8 + ⋯ + ( 4 9 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 1 + 1 ) − ( 1 0 0 5 0 − 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ( 2 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 4 8 − ⋯ − ( 4 9 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 1 + 1 ) ( 1 0 0 5 0 + 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ( 2 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 4 8 + ⋯ + ( 4 9 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 1 + 1 ) − ( 1 0 0 5 0 − 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ( 2 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 4 8 − ⋯ − ( 4 9 5 0 ) ⋅ 1 0 0 1 + 1 ) 2 [ 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ⋯ + 1 ] 2 [ 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 + ( sum of positive numbers ) ] 2 [ 5 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 ] = 1 0 0 ⋅ 1 0 0 4 9 = 1 0 0 4 9 + 1 = 1 0 0 5 0
Thus, we have 1 0 1 5 0 − 9 9 5 0 > 1 0 0 5 0 , or equivalently, 1 0 1 5 0 > 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0 , this inequality tells us that 1 0 1 5 0 is larger than 1 0 0 5 0 + 9 9 5 0 .