⎩ ⎨ ⎧ x + y + z x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 4 = 6
If x , y , z are three real numbers satisfying the above system of equations, then find the maximum value of x y z .
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.
How do you get xy+yz+zx=5? I don't understand.
Log in to reply
We have x+y+z=4 Take square two sides of this equation: (x+y+z)^2 = 16 <=> x^2+y^2+z^2 + 2(xy+yz+xz) =16 <=> 6+2(xy+yz+xz) =16 (because x^2+y^2+z^2=6) <=> xy+yz+zx=5
How to do it by 3D geometry? One forms a sphere and the other is a plane and the intersection of these two equations is a circle. So what can I do after that?
Nice! I use a similar approach; see my separate post.
Log in to reply
Nice observation and thanks for a new trick to solve.
sir try this
Log in to reply
Thanks! I wish I could play around with these puzzles all day, but I'm off to work, teaching a little calculus. Maybe tonight...
I must confess that I don't fully understand the wording of the problem. Take a look at my attempt, and please do explain.
there is a more elegant solution
Log in to reply
Define "elegant", Dev ;)
Log in to reply
@Otto Bretscher – sir, it means that there is more easier solution.
Log in to reply
@Dev Sharma – There's no point in claiming that you have a better solution if you're not going to show it.
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Yes you are right
@Pi Han Goh – I solved it using cauchy schwarz, on x and y then find out min of z, then its easy
Log in to reply
@Dev Sharma – Can you post your solution?
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – I am not good at latex
Log in to reply
@Dev Sharma – Just type it out without latex.
@Dev Sharma – I'm sure I won't be expecting a solution from you any time soon.
Seriously!!!!!!!
What is the discriminant of of an cubic equation or how can I derive it??
don't understand
Log in to reply
First i made an equation whose roots are x , y , z . Then we know roots are real numbers so i used the discrimination of the equation you can find it at google.
My approach is similar to Lakshya's, but I avoid the somewhat tedious work with the discriminant.
By Viete, we have the polynomial f ( t ) = t 3 − 4 t 2 + 5 t − p whose roots are x , y , z , where p = x y z . This polynomial has the local maximum f ( 1 ) = 2 − p . If p > 2 , we have only one real solution, but for p = 2 we get the solutions 1 , 1 , 2 for x , y , z , in any order. Thus the maximum product is p = 2 .
there is one more solution:
use 2 ( y 2 + z 2 ) > = ( y + z ) 2 )
Log in to reply
Spell it out for us, please... I don't get it.
Can you write full solution .??
When I get to xy+xz+yz=5, I replace y+z by 4-x, and yz by d/x giving the equation (after rearranging): d=x^3-4x^2+5x Differentiating to get max d gives x=1 or 5/3 giving d = 2 or 1.85... Hence max d is 2.
Just to play the devil's advocate: What about x = 2 . 0 1 ? ;)
Log in to reply
tl;dr: x, y and z have to be between 2/3 and 2.
Please, be the devil's advocate! x = 2.01 gives a complex solution for y or z. Let's have a look at the boundaries (using geometry and graphs): let z be the one we want to bound (and the rest are similar by symmetry) (1) x^2+y^2=6-z^2 (2) x+y = 4 - z
Hence, (1) is a circle in the centre with radius sqrt(6-z^2). (2) a line with gradient -1 who's distance to (0,0) is the distance at x = y = 2-z/2 So said distance is (2-z/2) sqrt(2). To bound z we need: sqrt(6-z^2) > (2-z/2) sqrt(2) Or solving this gives: 2/3 < z < 2. Hence 2.01 is not in this and cannot be a solution.
Just for completeness: if x = 2/3, d = 1.85... and if x = 2: d = 2. And d(d)/dx = 3x^2-8x+5 which is positive from 2/3 to 1 where d = 2, and therefore cannot go higher.
Quite a long solution if you really want to be precise about it.
Log in to reply
I'm sorry for making you do all this work... thank you! There are easier ways to see that x, y, and z must be between 2/3 and 2: by symmetry, we must have y = z at the points with highest and lowest x values, and then the equations are easy to solve.
I just wanted to point out that one has to think about these issues in your solution. (I'm taking a slightly different approach to avoid the issue in my solution.)
Log in to reply
@Otto Bretscher – No worries, my pleasure to look into it as I was puzzled why x=2.01 gives d>2.
Log in to reply
@Benjamin Katz-Crowther – i tried A.M>=G.M Got xyz<=2.15(approx) Can u proceed from that?
Umm....I used quite an unorthodox way.I assumed that x^2,y^2,z^2 would be positive(since they aren't complex).And the only positive numbers whose squares add up to 6 were 2,1,1 . On top of that 2+1+1 was equal to 4.
Ha ha.., i thought it in a simpler way...... I thouht what values of xyz we can put to satisfy eq. Putting two of them as 1 and one as 2....
Thats what i did, simply substituting the valuea for variables x,y and z.... i.e. 1,1,2
Apply AM>=GM on both the equations.Then select the intersection of the inequalities and then GIF.
x+ y = 4 - z
x 2 + y 2 = 6 − z 2
using cauchy schwarz, then its easy
What's the next step?
Log in to reply
Then find min of z then find x and y by forming quadratic eq
Log in to reply
Please show your work. I doubt Cauchy Schwarz is a valid approach.
The question doesn't make sense.x=y=z yields 2.37 as the value of the product.
There is no solution with x = y = z .
Log in to reply
Shoot, I missed that. I was applying AM-GM directly. Thank you!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
x + y + z = 4 x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 6 x y + y z + z x = 5
Let x , y , z be the roots of some polynomial P ( a ) . Applying discrimination of cubic equation we will get an equation as.
0 ≥ 2 7 d 2 − 1 0 4 d + 1 0 0
Where d = x y z . We see the above value attains it maximum at 0 . Therefore the roots of equation will give the maximum value x y z . The roots of above equation are 2 , 5 4 1 0 0 . But only 2 is acceptable. How? That depends upon you.