How many positive x satisfy
x + x + x + … + n square roots ⋯ x = 1
for a given positive integer n ?
Bonus: What sorts of bounds can you put on these solution(s) in terms of n ?
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.
We can use the Arithmetic Mean Geometric Mean (AM-GM) Inequality on the numbers x , x , … , n square roots ⋯ x . The arithmetic mean is n 1 since there are n terms that sum to 1. The geometric mean is ⎝ ⎜ ⎜ ⎛ x ⋅ x ⋯ n square roots ⋯ x ⎠ ⎟ ⎟ ⎞ n 1 = ( k = 1 ∏ n x 2 k 1 ) n 1 = ( x ∑ k = 1 n 2 k 1 ) n 1 = ( x 1 − 2 n 1 ) n 1 .
Since the n numbers are unequal, by AM-GM inequality, the equality can't hold.
n n 1 > x 1 − 2 n 1 ⇒ x < n − n ⋅ ( 1 + 2 n − 1 1 )
which is tighter than n − n and therefore much tighter than n − 2 . For n = 3 , we get x < 3 − 3 ⋅ ( 1 + 7 1 ) ≈ 0 . 0 2 3 1 , which is much better than 9 1 ≈ . 1 1 . As n gets large, this bound becomes quite similar to n − n .
Log in to reply
Wow! that's nice <3
Log in to reply
Yeah -- it's a much better upper bound than n − 2 .
Can anyone find anything tighter? How about a lower bound tighter than 0?
Log in to reply
@Eli Ross – For the lower bound:
Let y = n square roots ⋯ x ⇒ y 2 = n − 1 square roots ⋯ x .
Notice that n − 1 square roots ⋯ x > n − 2 square roots ⋯ x > … > x . So
1 = x + x + x + … + n square roots ⋯ x < y + ( n − 1 ) y 2
This is a quadratic inequality, by the Quadratic Formula and using the fact that y > 0 , we have x 1 / 2 n = y > 2 n − 2 − 1 + 4 n − 3 ⇒ x > ( 2 n − 2 − 1 + 4 n − 3 ) 2 n .
Combining these inequalities gives ( 2 n − 2 − 1 + 4 n − 3 ) 2 n < x < n − n ⋅ ( 1 + 2 n − 1 1 )
Log in to reply
@Pi Han Goh – Awesome! A few follow-up ideas:
1) The upper bound is similar to n − n as n grows large. How does that lower bound look as n grows large?
2) Which of Pi Han's bounds do people think is "closer" to the actual values of x ?
3) Anyone have ideas for how we could tighten these further?
Let y = x 1 / 2 n , then we have an equation of y + y 2 + y 4 + … + y 2 n − 1 − 1 = 0 . By Descartes' Rule of Signs , there's one positive real root of y , thus there's only 1 positive real root of x .
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Imagine a graph of y = x + x + x + … + n square roots ⋯ x . It is clearly increasing in x and it is continuous. When x = 0 , y = 0 , while for x = 1 , y = n . Thus, for exactly one x between 0 and 1, the equation will be satisfied (imagine the graph intersecting the horizontal line y = 1 ).
Remark: While this idea is fairly intuitive, it is formalized in Calculus as the Intermediate Value Theorem .
So, can we start to bound what this solution for x might be?
For x < 1 , the terms in the sum are increasing; e.g. n square roots ⋯ x > ⋯ > x > x > x . Since there are n terms, we must have n ⋅ x < 1 , so x < n 2 1 . For example, if x + x + x = 1 , then 0 < x < 9 1 .
Challenge: Can you find tighter bounds?
One possible method will involve the Applying the Arithmetic Mean Geometric Mean Inequality .