b a < d c
If a , b , c , d (are real variables that) satisfy the above inequality, what can we say about
b + d a + c ?
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.
-2/3 < -1/3 then -2/3 < -3/6 < -1/3 ... If -2/3 < 1/2 then -2/3 < -1/5 < 1/2. Wait I see -2/3 < 1/-3 then -1/0 has no meaning so then Calvin I now will buy what you are selling
Log in to reply
That's a good point, that if b + d = 0 , then the fraction is undefined!
Maybe it could have been explicitly stated that a,b,c,d belong to the set of integers (and not necessarily to the set of whole numbers)
Log in to reply
Well, they are real numbers, not necessarily integers.
@Calvin Lin sir, the options given were little ambiguous. Now u asked "what can we say about b + d a + c ". U should've mentioned " b a < b + d a + c < d c for all a,b,c,d" Then your question would've been clear.
Log in to reply
Isn't that a given? These are variables, and not specific constant that you have chosen.
Completely unclear.answer from Calvin and what is more, not valid. For all real values except b and d equal zero, the solution a/b less than (a+c)/(b+d) less than c/d is one and only one correct answer.
Oleg Yovanovich
Log in to reply
Hi Oleg, I gave an explicit to the claim that b a < b + d a + c < d c . In particular, we have b d < 0 , which was necessary to create the counterexample.
I believe that you're making the assumption that b d > 0 . I'm guessing that this happened implicitly when you multiplied by the denominator without checking the signs, to claim that a d < b c .
Since there are no boundaries for a , b , c , d , we may free to assume either the numerators are non-positive (either positives) or denumerators are non-positive (either positives). If the statement will be true on b a < b + d a + c < d c , consider the statement before. b + d may also result to zero and even negatives, so it contradicts the statement.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
If some of these terms are negative, then it need not be true that b a < b + d a + c < d c . For example,
− 1 2 < 2 1 , but − 1 2 < 2 1 < 1 3
As pointed out by Julian, if b + d = 0 , then the fraction is undefined.