Sum of two numbers (a and b ) is 289
Find the minimum value of their product
Note - a & b are whole numbers
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.
It's nice that you've given an example to prove your proposition but how about proving it too!
It'd be nice if you could provide a complete solution .
Log in to reply
I did not know the mathematical proof behind it but just did it logically !!!! THANK you for the inequality !!!!
But isn't -290 considered to be less tan 0? hence, a=-290, b=1
Log in to reply
a , b are supposed to be whole numbers according to the question and whole numbers cannot be negative.
The set of whole numbers, denoted by W is equivalent to the set of non-negative integers.
Read the question care fully - 'a and b are whole numbers' !!!!
@Azhaghu Roopesh M , AM-GM inequality won't work here. It gives you an upper bound for the product, not the lower bound which we want to find! A mathematical proof would be simply the multiplication of similarly oriented inequalities.
a , b ∈ W ⟹ a ≥ 0 ∧ b ≥ 0 ⟹ a b ≥ 0 ; a + b = k ∀ k ∈ Z +
Note that multiplication of the inequalities is valid since they are similarly oriented and the equality cases occuring in the the final symmetric inequality ( at a = k , b = 0 or a = 0 , b = k ) are in accordance with the starting inequalities. Also, the problem conditions are not violated. Also, the value of the sum doesn't matter. The answer remains the same.
I don't know if I am right but the no. can be a = 290 and b = -1, and as "a" increases b decreases and hence product decreases.
"0 is sometimes included in the list of "whole" numbers (Bourbaki 1968, Halmos 1974), but there seems to be no general agreement. Some authors also interpret "whole number" to mean "a number having fractional part of zero," making the whole numbers equivalent to the integers."
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/WholeNumber.html
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
a = 289 , b = 0 - product = 0