Find the minimum value of x 6 + y 6 − 5 4 x y , where x and y are real numbers .
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.
Remember that AM-GM only establishes a lower bound. To show that it is in fact the minimum value you need to show that the expression actually has that value for some x and y (in this case the minimum occurs at ( 3 , 3 ) and ( − 3 , − 3 ) ).
Log in to reply
Yes but the lower bound in AM GM is always possible, just set all the terms equal so x^6 =y^6=27
Log in to reply
I'm not sure what you mean. By AM-GM 2 1 + 2 ≥ 2 , but clearly that lower bound is not possible. Perhaps you are talking about only a restricted class of applications of AM-GM.
Log in to reply
@Mark C – See lower bounds are taken into account only during the equality of two or more quantities but not what u have taken..................u can say in this question the value occurs when there is equality between x and y............. I hope i am correct................
Very nice solution thanks
x , y can be negative, then 6 x 6 y 6 = ∣ x y ∣ . So, further explanation needed.
Let me consider: x 6 + y 6 = ( x 2 ) 3 + ( y 2 ) 3
let x 2 = a and y 2 = b
Clearly a , b > 0 and hence I can apply AM GM inequality on them
a 3 + b 3 ≥ 2 a 3 b 3 = 2 ( x y ) 3 or 2 ( − x y ) 3
Now there arise two conditions :
Now let x y = t , using this substitution the equation can be written as
x 6 + y 6 − 5 4 x y ≥ 2 t 3 − 5 4 t
Using calculus u may calculate the minimum value of t 3 − 5 4 t which will turn out to be − 1 0 8
Using AM-GM inequality we have:
x 6 + y 6 − 5 4 x y ≥ 2 ∣ x y ∣ 3 − 5 4 x y .
Let a = x y . Thus we have to minimise the one variable function f ( a ) = 2 ∣ a ∣ 3 − 5 4 a . This can be done very easily using calculus, but I would like to apply AM-GM again, using an approach similar to @Manuel Kahayon .
Consider first the case a > 0 . I need to add e subtract some (two in this case because we have a to the power of 3 ) positive terms in order to apply the inequality and I would like to get + 5 4 a when these terms are multiplied together. So I can rewrite the function:
2 a 3 + b 1 + b 2 − b 1 − b 2 − 5 4 a ≤ 3 ( 2 a 3 b 1 b 2 ) 3 1 − b 1 − b 2 − 5 4 a .
Now if b 1 = b 2 = 5 4 we have 3 ( 2 ∗ 5 4 2 a 3 ) 3 1 = 5 4 a and so we have:
2 a 3 + 5 4 + 5 4 − 1 0 8 − 5 4 a ≤ − 1 0 8
When a = 3 > 0 we have affectively f ( 3 ) = − 1 0 8 so − 1 0 8 is a minimum when a > 0 .
Moreover, when a ≤ 0 we have f ( a ) ≥ 0 and so − 1 0 8 is a global minimum of f ( a ) .
Another beautiful solution. Thank you.
Assume x = y, they have a similar relationship, and simple is more efficient. So we have 2x^6 - 54x^2. Take the derivative. You get 12x^5 - 108x. You want this to equal 0. So we have 12x^5 = 108x. 12x^4 = 108. x^4 = 9. x^2 = 3. Plug in x^2 = 3 into 2x^6 - 54x^2. 54 - 162 = -108.
You have only shown that the expression attains a value of -108 when x=y. How do you know that the expression can't take a smaller value when x = y is not true?
I assumed that the minimum value was when x=y. x and y should each have an absolute value greater than 1, so that the expression has potential to be very negative. Assuming that, if x and y are both raised to the 6th power, they will become large positive values, because 6 is an even exponent. In addition, it also makes the equation slightly more negative. For example, plug in 2 cases. Case 1: x = 1, y = 3. Case 2: x = 2, y = 2. Even without calculating, I know that case 2 is more negative, because the product is larger, (1 * 3 = 3 compared to 2 * 2 = 4) and the sum of the exponents is smaller, (1^6 + 3^6 = 730 compared to 2^6 + 2^6 = 128). To minimize the positive value, it is best to make x =y.
Log in to reply
No, this is not a rigorous argument, note that there is a "-54xy" term as well, so your explanation is incomplete to say the least.
Your solution boils down to "Oh, I guessed the minimum value occurs when x=y". But that is not always the case. Read up Inequalities with strange equality conditions .
Log in to reply
But the eq is a symmetric one.So we can guess that the optimisation occurs when x=y.
Log in to reply
@Spandan Senapati – That's a common misconception. Read up Inequalities with strange equality conditions .
Can the problem be solved using partial derivative?
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Relevant wiki: Applying the Arithmetic Mean Geometric Mean Inequality
We cannot have x as negative and y as positive since − 5 4 x y will be positive, and so will the other terms, but we can easily see that the expression can attain a negative value, so we can have either x , y as both positive or both negative. Nevertheless, AM-GM is still applicable.
By AM-GM,
6 x 6 + y 6 + 2 7 + 2 7 + 2 7 + 2 7 ≥ 6 x 6 ⋅ y 6 ⋅ 3 1 2 .
This gives us 6 x 6 + y 6 + 2 7 + 2 7 + 2 7 + 2 7 ≥ 9 x y or x 6 + y 6 ≥ 5 4 x y − 1 0 8
Subtracting 5 4 x y to both sides gives us x 6 + y 6 − 5 4 x y ≥ − 1 0 8
So, our answer is − 1 0 8 .