The sum of the squares of three distinct real numbers in Geometric Progression (G.P.) is S 2 . If the sum of the numbers is λ . S , then λ 2 lies in which interval ?
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.
Log in to reply
Sir why did you first kept [ 3 1 , 1 ) ∪ ( 1 , 3 ) as the answer , what were you thinking
Log in to reply
I was trying to make it a more difficult question. In the question it is given that "three distinct numbers", If I write "not all three numbers are equal" in place of the former one, then the answer will be [ 3 1 , 1 ) ∪ ( 1 , 3 ) . Because in this case the value of common ratio can be − 1 , which will include the value 3 1 . I think you are getting me what I want to say. @megh choksi
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – I mean to say how can 3 , -3 , 3 , -3..... this be a G.P , please correct me , what do you think Sir
Log in to reply
@U Z – Obviously this sequence 3 , − 3 , 3 , − 3 , 3 . . . . . is a G.P. What's the problem in saying it G.P. ?
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – I think then it would'nt form an G.P ( common ratio - 1 or 1 ? we can't say what type of sequence it is)
Log in to reply
@U Z – if I ask you a question : 2 , 2 , 2 , 2 , 2 . . . . . . . . . . this sequence is a G.P.
This statement is true or false ?
What will be your answer ?
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – I would say no as common ratio does not makes sense here and sequence is a array of numbers which follows some pattern, I think so
Log in to reply
@U Z – Why doesn't common ratio make sense ? It is clear that common ratio is 1 here, so there is no issue with the common ratio and considering this ratio as G.P.
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – Consider this -
with respect to which circle can we say a sequence is formed?
and this we can say
Log in to reply
@U Z – Read the basic definition of G.P. and then think.
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – read it , so whats according to you , thanks for improving my knowledge
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – , according to you it's constant function!
Log in to reply
@U Z – The graph you've drawn is of f ( x ) = 1 , x ≥ 0 . And off course, f ( x ) = 1 is a constant function.
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – Thanks , there was picture of the sum of G.P in my mind , so can you provide a geometrical definition of G.P with common ratio 1 (as the one of the circle , now this is not allowing me to agree how common ratio can be one)
Log in to reply
@U Z – Suppose a circle, and another identical circles on that circle is a geometrical example with common ratio 1. When you will see, that will seem to you just one circle but there are many identical circles which can be supposed to be the terms of that G.P.
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – So you are saying a hellical structure , now see for common ratio as 1 we needed to go from 2 dimension to 3 dimension ,why?
Log in to reply
@U Z – All the circles overlap with each other and lie on the same plane. So why 3-D ???
Log in to reply
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – So as you are saying all the circles are overlapping , so why we considering not it as only one , so to make a sequence it would be necessary to make each of them distinct , which can only be possible if we keep on circle at origin and the other on z axis, I think so
I disagree with this now too - "In the first diagram, the first thing is that all the circles should be identical and if it is so, then no matter where you start from . It will always be the same thing."
Enjoyed very much discussing this , thanks for improving my knowledge.
Log in to reply
@U Z – If you think like this, then a single circle will be 3-dimensional figure, because when you will draw a circle, it will gain some height. If you draw a circle in x-y plane, then it will have some height in the z-axis direction too. @megh choksi
@Sandeep Bhardwaj – Once again the same doubt which circle will you take in consideration to start with, to make a sequence?
Log in to reply
@U Z – In the first diagram, the first thing is that all the circles should be identical and if it is so, then no matter where you start from . It will always be the same thing.
Take a deep breath my dear, and then relax. Don't get confused, these are straight-forward things. First take some inner peace and then think, you will get a way out.
Well done sir!!upvotes!!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
λ = x , S = s
r a , a , a r
a ( r + 1 + r 1 ) = x s
a 2 ( r 2 + 1 + r 2 1 ) = s 2
r + r 1 = y , r 2 + r 2 1 = y 2 − 2
a ( y + 1 ) = x s , a 2 ( y 2 − 1 ) = s 2
T h u s , a 2 ( y 2 − 1 ) = x 2 a 2 ( y 2 + 1 ) 2
y = x 2 − 1 x 2 + 1
r + r 1 = y , r 2 − y r + 1 = 0
a s r a t i o i s a l w a y s r e a l t h u s d i s c r i m i n a n t > 0
y 2 − 4 > 0 , y < − 2 o r y > 2
Thus,
x 2 − 1 x 2 + 1 < − 2 o r x 2 − 1 x 2 + 1 > 2
x 2 − 1 x 2 + 1 + 2 < 0 o r x 2 − 1 x 2 + 1 − 2 > 0
x 2 − 1 3 x 2 − 1 < 0 o r x 2 − 1 3 − x 2 > 0
( x 2 − 1 ) 2 3 ( x 2 − 3 1 ) ( x 2 − 1 ) < 0 o r ( x 2 − 1 ) 2 ( x 2 − 1 ) ( x 2 − 3 ) < 0
T h u s x 2 = λ 2 ∈ ( 3 1 , 1 ) ∪ ( 1 , 3 )