Too Complex to Solve!!

Algebra Level 5

If z 1 , z 2 , z 3 z_1,z_2,z_3 are complex numbers \text{complex numbers} such that z 1 = 2 |z_1| = 2 , z 2 = 3 |z_2| = 3 and z 3 = 4 |z_3| = 4 Find the maximum value of z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 |z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2

Try This question

Image Wikipedia


The answer is 87.

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.

5 solutions

Deepanshu Gupta
Mar 1, 2015

Here Answer is : 3 ( Z 1 2 + Z 2 2 + Z 3 2 ) \displaystyle{3({ \left| { Z }_{ 1 } \right| }^{ 2 }+{ \left| { Z }_{ 2 } \right| }^{ 2 }+{ \left| { Z }_{ 3 } \right| }^{ 2 })} .

Check out this discussion:: Click here

It's too easy problem. It is overated.

Ronak Agarwal - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

yes.Extremely overrated.I don't understand why its 400 points problem.

Utkarsh Bansal - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

Can you show your approach @Utkarsh Bansal

Parth Lohomi - 6 years, 3 months ago

why? because you have seen the solution, anyone here don t know why the triangular inequality isn t availabe

Omar El Mokhtar - 6 years, 3 months ago

Congratulations on 500 followers :D

Krishna Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

I guess I'll be needing atleast 40 hours in a day , wherein I'll play football for 20 hours !!

How would you spend the extra 4 hours ? Sorry if I am being a bother

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

Its been a long time since I played football, I would definitely like to play in that 4 hrs but the main objective of the status was for jee, seriously physical chemistry is a big hurdle for me specially that calculate amount of blah blah problems, can you help me out how to study it? Thanks.

And how was your paper taday :D

Krishna Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Krishna Sharma Wow! I am really honored that you are asking my help .

Interesting ... , Physical Chem is too easy, It's Inorganic Chem that's hard for me .

Since Phy Chem involves very less theory , what I did was practice questions and by practice I am also including "seeing questions" , i.e. just recalling what formula is used in it . I am sure even you agree that there are no special concepts involved in Phy Chem :)

Don't worry dude , Phy Chem is way too easy than Inorganic .

Btw today's paper was quite easy but too lengthy !!

Would you visit here ?

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member which book did you prefer ?

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Deepanshu Gupta I used "Problems in Physical and Inorganic Chem" by N Avasthi and VK Jaiswal .

I think for Phy Chem , NCERT is a total bore , but at the same time NCERT is the best for Inorganic chem .

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member me too sodium sir and v jaiswal.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Gautam Sharma Actually he likes to be called Sodium sir , did you know that ?

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member yeah i know that and even his mail id is something sodiumsir@ . gm....

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

@A Former Brilliant Member Thank's ! I have N avasthi , I will try it ! Can you please suggest good source for reading Geaseous state thoery ? Specially Real gas part , and Collision's theory etc.
Thank's

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Deepanshu Gupta Can you please wait for a minute , exactly one minute ? I'll just go and see if there's any good book in my library :)

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Deepanshu Gupta why not try resnick halliday.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Gautam Sharma He's talking abt Chemistry !! Look up my question on Collisions (Chemistry)

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member man resnick halliday contains the chapter Kinetic theory of gases,collisions ,gaseous state etc.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Gautam Sharma Dude I agree that Phy and Chem are interrelated , but Chem is best when it's studied in Chem with the best example being Structure of Atom :)

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member Agreed.Another example -thermo

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Deepanshu Gupta It seems I have studied Gaseous State from my Resonance Module . There it was very clearly explained and then I solved the DPPs related to the chapter so my concepts got cleared .

Btw there is another book called New Pattern IIT JEE Chem by Dr. RK Gupta which I haven't used a lot but it also has good concept clarifying questions .

Again I also have the worksheets from Bansal Classes .

I also use RC Mukherjee for reading i.e. how to solve questions in an easy manner .

That's all !!

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member Thank's , Do you know any online free Pdf for such book's ? I'am also in Bansal Classes ! In which region you are studying ? what's ur birth place ?

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Deepanshu Gupta do you have resnick ?if not here is the link of the page from where you can download it.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Gautam Sharma Thanks ! Actually I already have online pdf of it in my Mobile

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Deepanshu Gupta I am actually from Tamil Nadu . I live in Vadodara and btw the institue that I go to is IIT Ashram . It's just that they provide us with Bansal Classes Material so I have got loads of them with me .

Nope! I don't think that there's any free pdf for these books , although I believe that you can get a pdf of Atkins , but that's too high level for peeople like me , but you can try it :)

Still , if I find any link , I'll be sure to provide it to you :D

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@A Former Brilliant Member i have given a link for atkins in my reply.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Gautam Sharma Thanks ! @GAUTAM SHARMA

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

@A Former Brilliant Member Then It is useless ! Since I only want JEE level chemistry . This is my last year for chemistry i hope . I have no interest to expertise in chemistry :P If It is high level for u , then surely I can't able to read first page :)

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Deepanshu Gupta Sorry, but if it is ok with you , can we carry on our further conversation in your message board ? This page is too long , you see !!

I also have one another book called Notes in Physical Chem , I'll check that up right now and comment in your message board , ok ?

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Deepanshu Gupta And yes may be the best book in physical chemistry By PETER ATKINS. here is the page link just scroll down and find the book here

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Deepanshu Gupta For theory i always recommend Resnick halliday.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

@Krishna Sharma Ohhh Man ! what a coincidence , I too Hate physical chemistry ! We Both are on same Boat . Atleast I found somene who is facing same problem as me. I really Hate it ! Since This year also no one taught me it in conceptwise , I really did not Like Ionic eqm. , Even I scared Lot from it , I managed my condition's of Physical chemistry for main's , But I'am really worried about Advance . I Prepare Organic and inorganic well . I'am really amazed that people said that inorganic chem. , is subject of learning , But I Know in actual , it is very conceptual , which depend's on from which teacher's did we studied it , I know something's we have to learn , but still these are very few , This year I really found this subject as very conceptual . But Physical chemistry alway's put me down , Since I'am not good at calculation's. Also My physical chem. teacher is not so good .

Deepanshu Gupta - 6 years, 3 months ago

why we souldnt use triangular inequality directly?

Omar El Mokhtar - 6 years, 3 months ago

In this case z1, z2, z3 can not be equal, how are we minimising in your solution

Mayank Shrivastava - 6 years, 3 months ago
Patrick Corn
Mar 2, 2015

The expression equals 3 ( z 1 2 + z 2 2 + z 3 2 ) z 1 + z 2 + z 3 2 3(|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2+|z_3|^2) - |z_1+z_2+z_3|^2 . So the best we can do is to choose the z i z_i so that they sum to 0, whence the answer is 3 ( 4 + 9 + 16 ) = 87 3(4+9+16)=\fbox{87} .

(We can so choose the z i z_i because there is a triangle with sides 2 , 3 , 4 2,3,4 . This is an important point--if we changed the constant values of the z i |z_i| , the problem's answer might not be 3 times the sum of those squares anymore.)

why you don t use triangular inequality directly?

Omar El Mokhtar - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

Why don't you write up a solution that uses it directly and see if it's more elegant than mine, instead of asking the same question to every existing solution?

Patrick Corn - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

because i didnt get the same result mister smart.

Omar El Mokhtar - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Omar El Mokhtar Ok, so what did you do?

Patrick Corn - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Patrick Corn that s why i asked you, i didn t get the same result

Omar El Mokhtar - 6 years, 3 months ago

Really the easiest way to do this, Cheers!

Aditya Raut - 6 years, 3 months ago

i tried a geometric approach by drawing concentric circles with radii 2 3 and 4 respectively and then try and locate point z1 z2 and z3 on them to maximize the expression . turns out that my answer comes out to be 86 .could someone please help me with this approach . thanks .

Zerocool 141 - 4 years, 6 months ago

Let z 1 = x 1 + i y 1 , z 2 = x 2 + i y 2 z_1 = x_1 +iy_1 , z_2 = x_2 +iy_2 & z 3 = x 3 + i y 3 z_3 = x_3 +iy_3 .

Then x 1 2 + y 1 2 = 4 , x 2 2 + y 2 2 = 9 x_{1}^{2} +y_{1}^{2} = 4, x_{2}^{2} +y_{2}^{2} = 9 & x 3 2 + y 3 2 = 16 x_{3}^{2} +y_{3}^{2} = 16

And, z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 = |z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2 = 2 ( x 1 2 + y 1 2 + x 2 2 + y 2 2 + x 3 2 + y 3 2 ) 2(x_{1}^{2} +y_{1}^{2} +x_{2}^{2} +y_{2}^{2}+ x_{3}^{2} +y_{3}^{2}) - 2 ( x 1 x 2 + y 1 y 2 + x 2 x 3 + y 2 y 3 + x 3 x 1 + y 3 y 1 ) 2(x_{1} x_{2} + y_{1} y_{2} + x_{2} x_{3} + y_{2} y_{3} + x_{3} x_{1} + y_{3} y_{1}) .

\implies z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 = 58 |z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2 = 58 - 2 ( x 1 x 2 + y 1 y 2 + x 2 x 3 + y 2 y 3 + x 3 x 1 + y 3 y 1 ) 2(x_{1} x_{2} + y_{1} y_{2} + x_{2} x_{3} + y_{2} y_{3} + x_{3} x_{1} + y_{3} y_{1}) .

So in order to find the maximum value of z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 |z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2 , we have to find minimum value of x 1 x 2 + y 1 y 2 + x 2 x 3 + y 2 y 3 + x 3 x 1 + y 3 y 1 x_{1} x_{2} + y_{1} y_{2} + x_{2} x_{3} + y_{2} y_{3} + x_{3} x_{1} + y_{3} y_{1} .

Since we know that square of any real number is greater than or equal to 0. So we can use ( x 1 + x 2 + x 3 ) 2 + ( y 1 + y 2 + y 3 ) 2 0 (x_1 +x_2 +x_3)^2 +(y_1 +y_2 +y_3)^2 \ge 0

\implies x 1 2 + y 1 2 + x 2 2 + y 2 2 + x 3 2 + y 3 2 + x_{1}^{2} +y_{1}^{2} +x_{2}^{2} +y_{2}^{2}+ x_{3}^{2} +y_{3}^{2} + 2 ( x 1 x 2 + y 1 y 2 + x 2 x 3 + y 2 y 3 + x 3 x 1 + y 3 y 1 ) 0 2(x_{1} x_{2} + y_{1} y_{2} + x_{2} x_{3} + y_{2} y_{3} + x_{3} x_{1} + y_{3} y_{1}) \ge 0 .

\implies ( x 1 x 2 + y 1 y 2 + x 2 x 3 + y 2 y 3 + x 3 x 1 + y 3 y 1 ) 29 2 (x_{1} x_{2} + y_{1} y_{2} + x_{2} x_{3} + y_{2} y_{3} + x_{3} x_{1} + y_{3} y_{1}) \ge -\frac{29}{2}

Hence z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 58 2 × ( 29 2 ) |z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2 \le 58 - 2\times (-\frac{29}{2})

or z 1 z 2 2 + z 2 z 3 2 + z 3 z 1 2 87 \boxed{|z_1-z_2|^2 + |z_2-z_3|^2 + |z_3-z_1|^2 \le 87}

Ronak Agarwal
Mar 1, 2015

I just don't like complex numbers it's my weakest topic. Hence I am here presenting an algebric approach to this question with a little bit of calculus.

Let z 1 = 2 ( c o s θ 1 + i s i n θ 1 ) {z}_{1} = 2(cos{ \theta }_{ 1 }+isin{ \theta }_{ 1 })

z 2 = 3 ( c o s θ 2 + i s i n θ 2 ) {z}_{2} = 3(cos{ \theta }_{ 2 }+isin{ \theta }_{ 2 })

z 3 = 4 ( c o s θ 3 + i s i n θ 3 ) {z}_{3} = 4(cos{ \theta }_{ 3 }+isin{ \theta }_{ 3 })

So the expression that needs to be maximised get's converted into :

S = 58 ( 12 c o s ( θ 1 θ 2 ) + 24 c o s ( θ 2 θ 3 ) + 16 c o s ( θ 3 θ 1 ) ) S = 58-(12cos({ \theta }_{ 1 }-{ \theta }_{ 2 })+24cos({ \theta }_{ 2 }-{ \theta }_{ 3 })+16cos({ \theta }_{ 3 }-{ \theta }_{ 1 }))

Now take θ 1 θ 2 = x , θ 2 θ 3 = y {\theta}_{1}-{\theta}_{2}=x,{\theta}_{2}-{\theta}_{3}=y

S = 58 ( 12 c o s ( x ) + 24 c o s ( y ) + 16 c o s ( x + y ) ) S = 58-(12cos(x)+24cos(y)+16cos(x+y))

After some simplification we have :

S = 58 ( ( 12 + 16 c o s ( y ) ) c o s ( x ) + ( 16 s i n y ) s i n ( x ) + 24 c o s ( y ) ) S = 58 -( (12+16cos(y))cos(x)+(16siny)sin(x) + 24cos(y) )

Remember that we have to maximise S S

and hence it comes down to minimizing

f ( y ) = ( 12 + 16 c o s ( y ) ) c o s ( x ) + ( 16 s i n y ) s i n ( x ) + 24 c o s ( y ) f(y) = (12+16cos(y))cos(x)+(16siny)sin(x) + 24cos(y)

and x x and y y are independent variables and minimum value of a c o s ( x ) + b s i n ( x ) acos(x)+bsin(x) is a 2 + b 2 -\sqrt{{a}^{2}+{b}^{2}}

Hence we are minimizing :

f ( y ) = 24 c o s ( y ) 400 + 384 c o s ( y ) f(y) = 24cos(y)-\sqrt { 400+384cos(y) }

differentiate and equate it to zero to get :

c o s ( y ) = 21 24 cos(y) = -\dfrac{21}{24}

Finally f ( y ) m i n = 29 {f(y)}_{min} = 29

S m a x = 87 \boxed{{S}_{max} = 87}

I agree with you , seriously I got 400 points for it . And nice solution, I instinctively used complex nos though

A Former Brilliant Member - 6 years, 3 months ago

Bro, 58+19=77 not 87, typo , f(y) min = 29

Mvs Saketh - 6 years, 3 months ago
Mvs Saketh
Mar 1, 2015

Finally accomplished, using partial derivatives,

I present a partial derivative approach, which is awesome in certain situations like finding tangent or normal for implicit equations instead of using normal derivative or to easily find out rate of change along any 3-D direction or ofcourse as here to extremise functions that depend on more than one varriable

As the situation is invariant under rotation, let us fix one of the points as (2,0) (the inner most one ofcourse, my wish)

So we have

z 1 z_1 = 2+i

z 2 z_2 = 3(cos(y) + i sin(y))

z 3 z_3 = 4(cos(z) + i sin(z))

so inputting in the expression using distance formula

we have

58-(12cos(y) + 24cos(z) + 16 cos( y-z)) = S which has to be maximised

so we have to minimise

12cos(y) + 24cos(z) + 16 cos( y-z)=f

so let us partial differentiate with respect to x and y set each = 0

to get

δ f δ y = 0 = 12 s i n ( y ) 16 s i n ( y z ) ( a ) δ f δ z = 0 = 24 s i n ( z ) + 16 s i n ( y z ) ( b ) c o m b i n i n g b o t h w e a l s o g e t 1 2 s i n ( y ) = s i n ( z ) ( c ) n o w f r o m ( a ) w e g e t , 3 4 s i n ( y ) = s i n ( y z ) = s i n ( y ) c o s ( z ) c o s ( y ) s i n ( z ) s u b s t i t u n g ( b ) , a n d s i m p l i f y i n g ( s q u a r i n g a f t e r t r a n s p o s i n g ) w e g e t , c o s ( z ) = 7 8 f r o m w h i c h w e a l s o g e t c o s ( y ) = 1 4 c o s ( z y ) = 11 16 s u b s t i t u t i n g , w e h a v e 29 a s t h e m i n i m u m v a l u e \frac { \delta f }{ \delta y } =0=-12sin(y)-16sin(y-z)----(a)\\ \\ \frac { \delta f }{ \delta z } =0=-24sin(z)+16sin(y-z)----(b)\\ \\ combining\quad both\quad we\quad also\quad get\\ \\ \frac { -1 }{ 2 } sin(y)\quad =\quad sin(z)----(c)\\ \\ now\quad from\quad (a)\quad we\quad get,\\ \\ \frac { -3 }{ 4 } sin(y)\quad =\quad sin(y-z)\quad =sin(y)cos(z)\quad -\quad cos(y)sin(z)\quad \\ \\ substitung\quad (b)\quad ,\quad and\quad simplifying(squaring\quad after\quad transposing)\quad we\quad get,\\ \\ cos(z)\quad =\quad \frac { -7 }{ 8 } \quad from\quad which\quad we\quad also\quad get\quad cos(y)\quad =\quad \frac { 1 }{ 4 } \quad cos(z-y)\quad =\quad \frac { -11 }{ 16 } \\ \\ substituting,\quad we\quad have\quad -29\quad as\quad the\quad minimum\quad value\\

so we have 58+29 = 87 which is the answer

its a shame i took so long,

Deepanshu's solution is elegant,isn't it?

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

I m fed up withis marking system. when i correctly answer a 400 points problem i get 10 increase in my ratings and when i answer it wrong i get upto 30-50 ratings deducted and 0 increase for problem under 200. i think they should do something.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

chill bro you are still in level 5 :) , also (i dont know rules of rating as i am not a moderator)

Mvs Saketh - 6 years, 3 months ago

Log in to reply

@Mvs Saketh level 5 doesn't bother me as i have rating around 2600 in algebra and 2200 in mechanics but these marking does.

Gautam Sharma - 6 years, 3 months ago

Indeed it is, it shows how complex inequalities have an upper hand over standard methods of algebra,

Mvs Saketh - 6 years, 3 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...