If x x = ( 2 1 ) 2 1 , does this imply that x = 2 1 ?
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 took the help of a graphing calculator.. is there any other rigourous method to check the same @Pi Han Goh @Shourya Pandey
Log in to reply
One way of doing it is to see that " 0 0 " = 1 and f ( x ) = x x has a minima at x = e 1 . Since f ( 0 ) > f ( 2 1 ) > f ( e 1 ) , so by Intermediate Value Theorem, there is a 0 < c < e 1 for which f ( c ) = f ( 2 1 ) .
Log in to reply
Ok, Thanks . I've heard of Intermediate Value Theorem. But I can relate to what you said. Thanks again
x = ( 2 n 1 ) where n ∈ Z
Substituting this in the equation and simplifying gives 2 n = 2 2 n − 1 ⇒ n = 2 n − 1 ⇒ n = 1 , 2
For n = 3 , 2 n − 1 > n
So taking this as the base step and inducting on n :
For n = m , 2 m − 1 > m
Also , 2 m − 1 ≥ 1
Adding the two inequalities , we get 2 m > m + 1
Hence , it s true for n = m + 1 and hence our induction stands complete.
⇒ There are no solutions for n ≥ 3
Log in to reply
Huh? What are you trying to show here?
Log in to reply
I just wanted to find all the solutions and I have shown that in my comment.
I have shown that 2 1 , 4 1 are the solutions.
I hope that this works.
Thanks!
@Pi Han Goh Sir , I have edited it a bit ..Is it fine now??
Log in to reply
I still don't understand what you're doing. Sure n = 2 n − 1 gives solutions of n = 1 , 2 , but how do you know there isn't any non-integer solution? Or how do you know that there isn't any non-real solution?
Plus, you claimed that the solution for x is in the form of x = 2 n 1 , but why must x be a rational power of 2 to begin with? How do you know that there isn't a solution for say, x = 3 n 1 ?
On the other hand, if you want to show that x = 2 n 1 is a solution for integer n via induction, then shouldn't ALL the solution be x = 2 1 1 , 2 2 1 , 2 3 1 , 2 4 1 , … ?
(Note that your working for the proof by induction is also wrong, do you know where you went wrong?)
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – I presumed that x = 2 n 1 that was the error , if somehow we can prove that the solutions would be of this form , then I think that the rest of the solution will be fine.
As for the non - integer solutions of n = 2 n − 1 , I already presumed n to be an integer.
Through induction I wanted to sow that for n ≥ 3 there are no solutions for n = 2 n − 1
Where is my induction part wrong ?? Sir , can you please point out the errors?
Log in to reply
if somehow we can prove that the solutions would be of this form , then I think that the rest of the solution will be fine.
That's the thing: You didn't prove that all of the solutions of x must be an integer power of 2.
Through induction I wanted to sow that for n ≥ 3 there are no solutions for n = 2 n − 1
Ah I see. It's not clear what you're trying to achieve here. If you want to prove that there's no integer solution of n = 2 n − 1 for n ≥ 3 , then it's better to start with the proposition of "Let P ( n ) = n − 2 n − 1 . I will prove that P ( n ) < 0 for all integers n ≥ 3 via induction."
On the other hand, (once again) your solution only shows that there is no integer solution of n = 2 n − 1 for n ≥ 2 . But how do you know that there isn't a non-integer solution, say n = 3 . 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ?
This is a good attempt, but unfortunately, your proof isn't rigorous because you have only shown that if x is a rational power of 2, then the only solutions of are 1 / 2 and 1 / 4 .
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – I got your point . Thanks!!
Is there any way by which we can find all the solutions?
Log in to reply
@Ankit Kumar Jain – First show that x^x is not a strictly increasing function in the interval (0,1), then show that it's strictly decreasing in (0, 1/e ] and strictly increasing in [1/e , 1). Now we know that x=1/2 > 1/e is a solution, so there exists precisely one other solution in (0, 1/e ] , trial and error shows that x=1/4 is the (only) other solution.
@Pi Han Goh – Sir , what do you mean by this 'On the other hand, if you want to show that x = 2 n 1 is a solution for integer n via induction, then shouldn't ALL the solution be x = 2 1 1 , 2 2 1 , 2 3 1 , 2 4 1 , … ?'??
The question is worded improperly. The asker meant to ask if it implied that x=1/2 is the only solution, which it doesn't, but what he actually asked was if it implies that x=1/2 is a solution, which it does.
Therefore the correct answer here is yes.
Log in to reply
The question is phrased properly. Consider the following:
If person A is a boy, does this imply that person A is Matthew?
Even though Matthew is a boy, that doesn't necessarily imply that person A can only be Matthew. Just as the answer to this question is no, the answer to the problem is also no.
@Shourya Pandey. How did you figure that the function has a minimum at 1/e? Thanks.
Log in to reply
Sorry for the late reply. Differentiate the function y = x x and equate it to zero. Differentiation of x x :
y = x x
l n y = x l n x
d x d ( l n y ) = d x d ( x l n x )
y y ′ = 1 + l n x
y ′ = y ( 1 + l n x ) = x x ( 1 + l n x ) .
Using calculus, one has that x x approaches 1 as x approaches 0 from the right, decreases to a minimum at x = 1 / e , and increases thereafter. Therefore, for ALL y ∈ ( ( e 1 ) 1 / e , 1 ) , the equation x x = y has two solutions!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
We have ( 4 1 ) 4 1 = ( 4 1 ) 2 1 = ( 2 1 ) 2 1 ,
So x could be 4 1 too.