Can We Cancel Out The Powers?

Algebra Level 3

Which of the following numbers is larger? ( 101 ) 50 or 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 (101)^{50} \quad \text{or} \quad 100^{50} + 99^{50}

10 1 50 101^{50} 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 100^{50} + 99^{50} They are equal

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.

9 solutions

Pi Han Goh
Feb 29, 2016

We want to find the mathematical symbol satisfying the inequation/equation below.

10 1 50 = ? 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 101^{50} \stackrel{?}{=} 100^{50} + 99^{50}

Notice that 99 = 100 1 99 = 100 - 1 and 101 = 100 + 1 101 = 100 + 1 , by binomial theorem expansions , we can show that for a > b > 0 a>b>0 , and n > 0 n> 0 , all the terms of ( a + b ) n ( a b ) n (a+b)^n - (a-b)^n is strictly positive. In this case, a = 100 , b = 1 a= 100,b = 1 .

10 1 50 9 9 50 = ( 100 + 1 ) 50 ( 100 1 ) 50 = ( 10 0 50 + 50 10 0 49 + ( 50 2 ) 10 0 48 + + ( 50 49 ) 10 0 1 + 1 ) 0 ( 10 0 50 50 10 0 49 + ( 50 2 ) 10 0 48 ( 50 49 ) 10 0 1 + 1 ) = ( 10 0 50 + 50 10 0 49 + ( 50 2 ) 10 0 48 + + ( 50 49 ) 10 0 1 + 1 ) 0 ( 10 0 50 50 10 0 49 + ( 50 2 ) 10 0 48 ( 50 49 ) 10 0 1 + 1 ) = 2 [ 50 10 0 49 + + 1 ] = 2 [ 50 10 0 49 + ( sum of positive numbers ) ] > 2 [ 50 10 0 49 ] = 100 10 0 49 = 10 0 49 + 1 = 10 0 50 \begin{aligned} 101^{50} - 99^{50} &=& (100 + 1)^{50} - (100-1)^{50} \\ &=& \left (100^{50}+ 50\cdot 100^{49} + \dbinom{50}2 \cdot 100^{48} + \cdots + \dbinom{50}{49} \cdot100^1 + 1 \right) \\ & \phantom0 & - \left (100^{50} - 50\cdot 100^{49} + \dbinom{50}2 \cdot 100^{48} - \cdots - \dbinom{50}{49} \cdot100^1 + 1 \right) \\ &=& \left (\cancel{100^{50}}+ 50\cdot 100^{49} + \cancel{\dbinom{50}2 \cdot 100^{48}} + \cdots + \cancel{\dbinom{50}{49} \cdot100^1} + 1 \right) \\ & \phantom0 & - \left (\cancel{100^{50}} - 50\cdot 100^{49} + \cancel{\dbinom{50}2 \cdot 100^{48}} - \cdots - \cancel{\dbinom{50}{49} \cdot100^1} + 1 \right) \\ &=& 2\left [50\cdot 100^{49} + \cdots + 1 \right ] \\ &=& 2\left [50\cdot 100^{49} + (\text{sum of positive numbers}) \right ] \\ &> & 2\left [50\cdot 100^{49} \right ] = 100 \cdot 100^{49} = 100^{49 + 1} = 100^{50} \\ \end{aligned}

Thus, we have 10 1 50 9 9 50 > 10 0 50 101^{50} - 99^{50} > 100^{50} , or equivalently, 10 1 50 > 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 101^{50} > 100^{50} + 99^{50} , this inequality tells us that 10 1 50 101^{50} is larger than 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 100^{50} + 99^{50} .

Moderator note:

Great usage of the Binomial theorem to prove the inequality :)

Same way I did it.

David Richner - 4 years, 4 months ago

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?!

Ricardo Martinelli - 4 years, 3 months ago

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.

Pi Han Goh - 4 years, 3 months ago
Calvin Lin Staff
Feb 29, 2016

Claim: 1 < 1.0 1 50 0.9 9 50 1 < 1.01 ^ {50} - 0.99 ^ { 50} .

We use the binomial theorem: ( 1 + x ) 50 = 1 + ( 50 1 ) x + ( 50 2 ) x 2 + ( 50 3 ) x 3 + (1+x)^{50} = 1 + { 50 \choose 1 } x + { 50 \choose 2 } x^2 + { 50 \choose 3 } x^3 + \ldots

With x = 0.01 x = 0.01 , we see that 1.0 1 50 = 1 + ( 50 1 ) × 0.01 + ( 50 2 ) × 0.0 1 2 + ( 50 3 ) × 0.0 1 3 + 1.01^{50} = 1 + {50\choose 1} \times 0.01 +{50\choose 2} \times 0.01^2 + {50\choose 3} \times 0.01^3 + \ldots .
With x = 0.01 x = -0.01 , we see that 0.9 9 50 = 1 ( 50 1 ) × 0.01 + ( 50 2 ) × 0.0 1 2 ( 50 3 ) × 0.0 1 3 + 0.99 ^ {50} = 1 - {50\choose 1} \times 0.01 + {50\choose 2} \times 0.01^2 - {50\choose 3} \times 0.01^3 + \ldots .

Subtracting these 2 equations, we get that

1.0 1 50 0.9 9 50 = 2 × ( 50 1 ) × 0.01 + 2 × ( 50 3 ) × 0.0 1 3 + 2 × ( 50 5 ) × 0.0 1 5 > 1 + > 1 1.01^{50} - 0.99 ^ { 50} = 2 \times {50\choose 1} \times 0.01 + 2 \times {50 \choose 3} \times 0.01^3 + 2 \times { 50 \choose 5 } \times 0.01^5 \ldots > 1 + \ldots > 1 .


Multiplying throughout by 10 0 50 100^{50} , we see that 9 9 50 + 10 0 50 < 10 1 50 99 ^{50} + 100 ^ {50} < 101 ^ {50} .

99^4+100^4>101^4. What is the minimum value of power n for which 99^n+100^n<101^n holds.

j chaturvedi - 5 years, 3 months ago

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?

Calvin Lin Staff - 5 years, 3 months ago

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.

carl noble - 3 years, 4 months ago

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 ( 1.01 ) 50 ( 0.99 ) 50 > 1 (1.01)^{50} - (0.99)^{50} > 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 50 1.645 1.01^{50} \approx 1.645 and 0.9 9 50 0.605 0.99^{50} \approx 0.605 .

Calvin Lin Staff - 3 years, 4 months ago

Right answer but x = ± 0.01 not ± 0.1 (4th & 5th line)

Mustafa Embaby - 4 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

Oh yes. Thanks! Edited :)

Calvin Lin Staff - 4 years, 3 months ago

We can determine which number is the larger of the two by dividing one by the other. Recall that a b < 1 \frac {a}{b}<1 if a < b a<b .

Using the same principle:

10 0 50 + 9 9 50 10 1 50 = ( 100 101 ) 50 + ( 99 101 ) 50 < 1 \frac {100^{50}+99^{50}}{101^{50}}=\big(\frac {100}{101}\big)^{50}+\big(\frac {99}{101}\big)^{50}<1

Since 100 < 101 100<101 and 99 < 101 99<101 , 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 \lim_{x\to\infty} a^x\rightarrow0 if a < 1 a<1 (and 50 is a relatively large power). Therefore, our denominator must be larger than our numerator: 10 1 50 > 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 101^{50}>100^{50}+99^{50} .

Moderator note:

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.

Paweł Bieliński - 4 years, 7 months ago

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.

t k - 4 years, 3 months ago

Indeed, the break-even point is merely 48.22752430…

Jerry Barrington - 3 years, 11 months ago

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.

Jacques Labelle - 3 years, 4 months ago

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 Physicist Cuber Mauro - 3 years, 4 months ago

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.

chase marangu - 2 years, 8 months ago

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

Patrick Byrne - 2 years, 6 months ago

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

Buzz Breedlove - 2 years, 5 months ago
Karthi Jayapal
Mar 3, 2016

101^50=(100+1)^50 =100^50+100×100^49+....+1 =100^50+100^50+...+1 So

101^50 > 100^50+99^50

Moderator note:

This solution has a calculation error. The coefficient of 100^49 should be 50, not 100.

Note that 10 1 50 < 2 × 10 0 50 101^{50} < 2 \times 100 ^ { 50 } .

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?

Michelle Zhuang - 4 years, 5 months ago

What a clean solution! Nice.

Jeremy Fischman - 4 years, 7 months ago
Leonardo Vannini
Mar 2, 2016

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!

Anu Sood - 4 years, 6 months ago

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 10 1 50 101^{50} ,

So,

log 10 1 50 = log x 50 log 101 = log x log 101 = 2.0043 50 × 2.0043 = log x 100.215 = log x \log 101^{50}=\log x \\ 50 \log 101=\log x \\ \Rightarrow \log 101=2.0043 \\ 50 \times 2.0043=\log x \\ 100.215=\log x

Now we will find the Antilog of this,

x = x = antilog 0.215 0.215

(with 100 100 as the characteristic)

We get value as 1641 1641 and after putting the characteristic we get the approx value as,

1641000 000 1641000 \ldots 000

(with total 101 101 digits)

Now we will find the approx value of 9 9 50 99^{50} with the same procedure which comes out to be

6026000 000 6026000 \ldots 000

(with total 100 100 digits)

And 10 0 50 = 100000 0000 100^{50} = 100000 \ldots 0000

(with 101 101 digits )

So the approx value of 2 n d 2^{nd} expression is

16026000 000 16026000\ldots 000

(with 101 101 digits)

So by comparing the approx value of both,

10 1 50 > 10 0 50 + 9 9 50 \boxed{101^{50} > 100^{50} + 99^{50}}

Can you show your working ?

Akshat Sharda - 5 years, 3 months ago

Show the steps please

King Eil - 5 years, 3 months ago

101²=10201, 100²+99²=10000+9801=19801 ,what's true about given problem

Farooq Khan - 3 years, 11 months ago
Chase Marangu
Sep 4, 2018
 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
// this is my super calculaor
// It can calculate arbitrarily large integer addition and multiplication with a little lag
// at least thats better than normal javascript 3 byte limit
// SM stands for String Math
// I have incorporated standard multiplication and addition algorithms into functions that
// use javascript String objects to hold digits of numbers
// also I keep forgetting myself it works in bases from 2-16 as a bonus
// I plan to work on it more to make it work with custom digits/bases and
// to make it work without ever lagging by splitting calculations across frames
// but thats later
// anyways plug this code into https://www.khanacademy.org/computer-programming/new/pjs
// yeah I know not the most impressive, processingJS isnt very advanced and khan
// academys platform isnt very professional but its where I firsrt learned and
// I tend to prototype everything on it


var SMbase = 10;

var SMadd = function(addend1, addend2) {
    var sum = "";
    var carry = 0;
    var meta = 0;
    var meta_addend1;
    var meta_addend2;
    for (var i=0, flag1=true; flag1 && i<max(addend1.length, addend2.length)+1; i++) {
        meta_addend1 = parseInt(addend1[addend1.length-i-1], SMbase)|0;
        meta_addend2 = parseInt(addend2[addend2.length-i-1], SMbase)|0;
        meta = meta_addend1+meta_addend2+carry;
        sum = (meta%SMbase) + sum;
        carry = floor(meta/SMbase);
        if (carry === 0 && i>=max(addend1.length, addend2.length)-1) {
            flag1 = false;
        }
    }
    return sum;
};

var SMmult = function(multiplicand1, multiplicand2) {
    var product = "";
    var addends = [];
    var carry = "";
    var meta = 0;
    var meta_multiplicand1;
    var meta_multiplicand2;
    multiplicand1 = multiplicand1;
    multiplicand2 = multiplicand2;
    for (var j=0; j<multiplicand2.length || carry!==0; j++) {
        addends[j] = "";
        for (var i=0; i<multiplicand1.length || carry!==0; i++) {
            meta_multiplicand1 = parseInt(multiplicand1[multiplicand1.length-i-1], SMbase)|0;
            meta_multiplicand2 = parseInt(multiplicand2[multiplicand2.length-j-1], SMbase)|0;
            meta = meta_multiplicand1*meta_multiplicand2+carry;
            addends[j] = (meta%SMbase) + addends[j];
            carry = floor(meta/SMbase);
        }

    }
    var m = "";
    for (var j in addends) {
        product = SMadd(addends[j]+m, product);
        m += "0";
    }
    return product;
};

var n99 = "1";
var n100 = "1";
var n101 = "1";

for (var i=0; i<50; i++) {
    n99 = SMmult(n99, "99");
    n100 = SMmult(n100, "100");
    n101 = SMmult(n101, "101");
}

var n10099 = SMadd(n100, n99);

println(n10099);
println(n101);

Jacques Labelle
Jan 28, 2018

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 ?

denis baudouin - 3 years, 1 month ago
Luther Lessor
Jun 1, 2017

We can rule out the equality by Fermat's Last Theorem.

Good observation

James Wilson - 2 years, 7 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...