Suppose that positive integers a , b , c , d and e are such that their product equals their sum, which we call x .
S is the sum of the n possible distinct values of x . What is n + S ?
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.
Log in to reply
Thanks for the link. It's interesting to note that the n -variable cases that have unique solutions are for n = 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 2 4 , 1 1 4 , 1 7 4 , 4 4 4 . Proving that the n = 4 4 4 variable case is the largest case with a unique solution is an open question. (Computer analysis has been done to 1 3 billion variables so it seems probable that 4 4 4 is the largest, but a proof remains elusive.)
How did u get the initial click in mind to proceed with the above mentioned solution becoz I sat for about hour but was unable to start!was it that u first got the answer and then proceeded in proving it??
Log in to reply
Hint: Start by thinking about what are largest possible values of each of these values. And work your way down. Read the attached wiki provided in the question as well: diophantine equations - solve by bounding values .
I devised this strategy when I tried the question that inspired this one, i.e., where only three variables are involved. With a + b + c = a b c I first looked at creating some kind of upper bound so that I could limit the number of cases I needed to examine. So assuming the variables to be ordered as a ≤ b ≤ c I could write that a + b + c ≤ 3 c . With this bound in mind, we notice that for a + b + c to equal a b c we need a b c ≤ 3 c as well. Dividing through by c yields the inequality a b ≤ 3 , which limits what ( a , b ) can be to ( 1 , 3 ) , ( 1 , 2 ) and ( 1 , 1 ) . Dealing with each of these cases in turn reveals that with a ≤ b ≤ c the only possible solution is ( a , b , c ) = ( 1 , 2 , 3 ) .
I followed this same strategy for solving this problem, this time creating the upper bound a b c d ≤ 5 . Often when there are a lot of variables involved it's helpful in devising a solution strategy to consider a similar problem involving fewer variables and seeing if that "initial click" is more apparent.
For me it was helpful to first divide out by the product, which gives a b c d 1 + a b c e 1 + a b d e 1 + a c d e 1 + b c d e 1 = 1 . It's impossible for all the denominators to be ≥ 6 , so a b c d ≤ 5 .
Pretty much the same thing you did, but looking at fractions made things easier to see for me.
Without loss of generality, suppose that a ≥ b ≥ c ≥ d ≥ e .
We obtain the following system of equations:
a ( b c d e − 1 ) = b + c + d + e
b ( a c d e − 1 ) = a + c + d + e
c ( a b d e − 1 ) = a + b + d + e
d ( a b c e − 1 ) = a + b + c + e
e ( a b c d − 1 ) = a + b + c + d
Adding all five equations up give:
p a + q b + r c + s d + t e = 4 ( a + b + c + d + e ) , where p ≤ q ≤ r ≤ s ≤ t
We conclude that d = e = 1 . Otherwise, 2 . 2 . 2 . 1 − 1 = 7 ≤ p ≤ q ≤ r ≤ s ≤ t , making the sum on L.H.S. greater than the sum on R.H.S., which is impossible.
Therefore, write a b c = x , a + b + c = x − 2 , from which we obtain a b c = a + b + c + 2 .
Rewrite the equation as ( a − 2 ) ( b c − 1 ) + b ( c − 1 ) + c ( b − 1 ) = 4 . Let's first suppose that a ≥ 3 .
Note that all the terms are non-negative integers. Let's first suppose that one or more of them equal 0 , which is only possible if either b c = 1 , c = 1 or b = 1 .
However, note that b c = 1 → b = 1 , c = 1 , which makes the three terms add up to 0 = 4 .
Suppose now that c = 1 . We obtain the equation ( a − 1 ) ( b − 1 ) = 4 , of which possible solutions are a = 5 , b = 2 , a = 3 , b = 3 and a = 2 , b = 5 . We reject the third solution since a < b , which violates our initial assumption.
If b = 1 , we obtain the equation ( a − 1 ) ( c − 1 ) = 4 , but all of the solutions ( a , b , c ) = ( 5 , 1 , 2 ) , ( 3 , 1 , 3 ) , ( 2 , 1 , 5 ) violates our initial assumptions.
Now, having considered the possibilities that one or more of the terms equal 0 , we focus on cases where they are all positive.
The only partition of 4 as three positive integers is 2 + 1 + 1 .
Suppose that ( a − 2 ) ( b c − 1 ) = 1 . This implies a = 3 , b c = 2 , which means one of b or c must equal 1 . However, this makes one of b ( c − 1 ) or c ( b − 1 ) equals 0 .
Suppose that b ( c − 1 ) = 1 . This implies that b = 1 , c = 2 . However, this makes c ( b − 1 ) = 0 . A similar argument applies when c ( b − 1 ) = 1 .
Therefore, it is impossible that all three terms are positive.
Now, we must remember to consider separately the cases where a ≤ 2 since we suppose a ≥ 3 at the beginning. Out of all possible combinations ( 2 , 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 2 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) and ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) , only ( 2 , 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) fits the criteria.
Removing our initial assumption of a ≥ b ≥ c ≥ d ≥ e , we find that the all the solutions are permutations of the following:
( 2 , 2 , 2 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 3 , 3 , 1 , 1 , 1 ) , ( 5 , 2 , 1 , 1 , 1 )
Therefore, there are 3 possible sums, which adds up to 8 + 9 + 1 0 = 2 7 , hence the answer 3 + 2 7 = 3 0
Good solution bounding the possible values.
An interesting, detailed solution. Thanks for posting it. :)
Clearly, 5 1's will not work since 1 .ne.5. If we have 4 1's, then n,1,1,1,1 are the numbers with product n and sum n + 4, so also impossible. If we have 3 1's, the numbers are n,k,1,1,1 with product nk and sum n + k + 3. Brief trial and error shows that n,k = 5,2 giving product = 10 and sum = 10. Second solution is 3,3 giving product and sum = 9. Lastly, for 2 1's, the only solution is 2,2,2,1,1 with product and sum = 8. So n = 3, the values of x are 8,9, and 10, so S = 27, and n + S = 30.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Without loss of generality assume that 0 < a ≤ b ≤ c ≤ d ≤ e . Then a + b + c + d + e ≤ 5 e .
Now suppose a b c d > 5 . Then since e is positive we have that a b c d e > 5 e , which combined with the previous result implies that a b c d e > 5 e ≥ a + b + c + d + e . So since we wish to have a b c d e = a + b + c + d + e we are forced to conclude that a b c d ≤ 5 . This leaves us with the following cases to examine:
a b c d = 1 ⟹ e = a + b + c + d + e ⟹ a + b + c + d = 0 , which is not valid as a , b , c , d > 0 .
a b c d = 2 ⟹ 2 e = a + b + c + d + e ⟹ e = a + b + c + d . Now as a b c d = 2 and 0 < a ≤ b ≤ c ≤ d we must have ( a , b , c , d ) = ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 2 ) , which yields e = 5 and a b c d e = a + b + c + d + e = 1 0 .
a b c d = 3 ⟹ 3 e = a + b + c + d + e ⟹ 2 e = a + b + c + d . Now as a b c d = 3 we must have that ( a , b , c , d ) = ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 3 ) , which yields 2 e = 6 ⟹ e = 3 , which in turn yields that a b c d e = a + b + c + d + e = 9 .
a b c d = 4 ⟹ 4 e = a + b + c + d + e ⟹ 3 e = a + b + c + d . Now as a b c d = 4 we can have either ( a , b , c , d ) = ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 4 ) or ( a , b , c , d ) = ( 1 , 1 , 2 , 2 ) . In the first case we find that e is non-integral, and in the second case that 3 e = 6 ⟹ e = 2 , which yields a b c d e = a + b + c + d + e = 8 .
a b c d = 5 ⟹ 5 e = a + b + c + d + e ⟹ 4 e = a + b + c + d . Now as a b c d = 5 we must have that ( a , b , c , d ) = ( 1 , 1 , 1 , 5 ) , which yields e = 2 , in which case d > e , and besides, simply duplicates the value for x found in the a b c d = 2 case.
So we have n = 3 possible values for x which sum to S = 1 0 + 9 + 8 = 2 7 , and so n + S = 3 0 .