k = 1 ∑ n x k 2 k = 1 ∑ n − 1 x k x k + 1
Let M n be the maximum of the expression above, where x 1 , … , x n are positive real numbers. Find n → ∞ lim M n .
Bonus question : Find a closed formula for M n .
Note : The limit is much easier to find than M n itself.
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.
Ja genau! (+1) Just to make the solution complete, can you explain why the expression always has to be less than 1.
Where did you get M 4 = 2 0 1 5 + 5 from? That's not the value I found.
Log in to reply
1.) Completion of proof:
First we assume an order: ∣ x 1 ∣ < = ∣ x 2 ∣ < = ∣ x 3 ∣ < = . . . < = ∣ x n ∣
So we can write: x k x k + 1 < = x k + 1 2
Therefore: ∑ k = 1 n − 1 x k x k + 1 < = ∑ k = 2 n x k 2 < ∑ k = 1 n x k 2
q.e.d.
2.) Remark: The mentioned value for M 4 I got after calculation by hand using that first derivations to x k must be 0. Maybe that an error occured here.
Log in to reply
I don't mean to be difficult, but I don't think we can assume an ascending order of the variables since the function ∑ k = 1 n − 1 x k x k + 1 is not symmetric. At the maximum, the variables will not be ordered the way you assume.
One way to do it is to apply Cauchy-Schwarz to the two vectors ( x 1 , x 2 , . . . , x n , 0 ) and ( 0 , x 1 , . . . , x n − 1 , x n ) ; that gives ∑ k = 1 n − 1 x k x k + 1 < ∑ k = 1 n x k 2 so M n < 1 .
Log in to reply
@Otto Bretscher – I got the limit the same way ! Can you give any hint on the bonus question?
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
For x 1 = x 2 = . . . = x n the value is n n − 1 . But we find greater maxima for example 2 2 for n=3 or 2 0 1 5 + 5 for n=4. The value of the expression always has to be less than 1 and so does the maximum. Therefore we can write:
n n − 1 < = M n < 1
This means the limit will be equal 1.