If x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1 , find the value of E given that 1 − x 2 x + 1 − y 2 y + 1 − z 2 z ≥ E .
Round your answer to the nearest tenth.
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.
Nice solution Megh !
One Can also use Jenson's inequality
1 − z 2 ≥ 2 ( x + y ) 2
then to get the minimum of 1 − z 2 z , we need to find maximum of 1 − z 2 and you found its minimum.
You showed 1 − z 2 ≥ 2 ( x + y ) 2 , but from here you can't write 1 − z 2 z ≥ ( x + y ) 2 2 z , since when we reciprocate an inequality, its sign also changes. Now can you explain, how you did it then??
Nice problem @Krishna Ar ❤ ❤ ❤
Let : y = f ( x ) = 1 − x x i n ( 0 , 1 ) .
Let us consider Three Points on the curve which forms an convex polygon (Here it is Triangle) Since Graph is concave up , And Centroid G of triangle must lie inside the triangle . Now drop Perpendicular from G point which meets the given curve at P point So x-coordinate of both are same !
y G ≥ y p n ∑ f ( x i 2 ) ≥ f ( n ∑ x i 2 ) ∑ f ( x i 2 ) ≥ n f ( n 1 ) ( p u t n = 3 ) ∑ f ( x i 2 ) ≥ 3 2 3 A n s . .
In which chapter did you learnt this inequality?
Log in to reply
Actually it is not used in Specific chapter ! But I learned this technique From Amit agarwal's Book "Playing with graph's" In a question Like this:
T P T : ∑ sin A ≤ 2 3 3 .
More ever You can See This Jensen's Inequality
Note that without loss of optimality, we can restrict the variables to the set 0 ≤ x , y , z ≤ 1 . Straightforward calculus gives that each of the function 1 − x 2 x , 1 − y 2 y and 1 − z 2 z is convex in that restricted set. Hence their sum is convex and also the constraint set x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 1 is convex. Thus using KKT conditions of convex optimization theory, we note that the minimum value of the objective is attained at x ∗ = y ∗ = z ∗ = 3 1 . Hence E = 2 3 3 .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Let 1 − x 2 x + 1 − y 2 y + 1 − z 2 z = M
By RMS inequality ,
2 ( x + y ) 2 ≤ x 2 + y 2 = 1 − z 2
therefore
1 − z 2 z ≥ ( x + y ) 2 2 z
Thus ( for other 2 terms also)
M ≥ ( z + y ) 2 2 x + ( x + z ) 2 2 y + ( x + y ) 2 2 z . . . 1 .
By Cauchy - Schwartz inequality,
( x + y + z ) ( ( x + y ) 2 z + ( x + z ) 2 y + ( z + y ) 2 x ) ≥ ( ( x + y ) z + ( x + z ) y + ( z + y ) x ) 2 . . . . . . 2 .
( z + y ) x + ( x + z ) y + ( x + y ) z ≥ 2 3 . . . 3 (can be easily proved as its symmetric in a,b,c)
By RMS inequality,
( 3 x + y + z ) 2 ≤ 3 x 2 + y 2 + z 2 = 3 1 . . . 4
For 1 by 2,3
M ( E ) ≥ x + y + z 2 ( ( x + y ) z + ( x + z ) y + ( z + y ) x ) 2
E ≥ 3 2 ( 2 3 ) 2 = 2 3 3