x + y 1 + y + z 1 + z + x 1 = 2 ( x + y + z ) 1
If x , y and z are numbers such that the equation above is fulfilled, find the value of the expression below.
[ ( x + y ) 3 ( y + z ) 3 ] + [ ( y + z ) 3 ( z + x ) 3 ] + [ ( z + x ) 3 ( x + y ) 3 ] 6 4 ( x + y + z ) 6 − ( x + y ) 6 − ( y + z ) 6 − ( z + x ) 6
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.
I did that!
1/(x+y)+1/(y+z)=1/[2(x+y+z)]-1/(z+x)
(x+2y+z)/[(x+y)(y+z)]=-(x+2y+z)/[2(x+y+z)(z+x)]
Luego: (Hence)
x+2y+z=0
Reemplazamos en lo que se pide: (Replace in the final expression)
i) x+y+z=-y
ii) x+y=-(z+y)
iii) x+z=-2y
(Simplify to get the answer of 2)
Saludos (Cheers)
In order to reach the conclusion of x + 2 y + z = 0 . He made an assumption which is not necessarily valid.
What is this assumption?
How would you fix the proof?
ummmm what?
Log in to reply
Erm... What is this?
It is a list of equations explaining how he solved the problem.
Yes, it is not in English. No, you do not need to understand the language in order to understand his solution. Math is a universal language, and he is using symbols that you are aware of. The main conclusion is the 3rd equation, stating x + 2 y + z = 0 . See if you can figure out why that is true.
Log in to reply
I agree with u on that it was more of I couldn't follow his work or how he got those equations
Log in to reply
@Ashish Sacheti – Which step could you not follow? I can add an explanation there. As stated, "the main crux is to figure out why x + 2 y + z = 0 " (or, if it is true at all).
Notice that the equation
a 1 + b 1 + c 1 = a + b + c 1
can be rewritten as
( a + b + c ) ( a b + b c + a c ) = a b c
We then notice that
( a + b + c ) ( a b + b c + a c ) − a b c = ( a + b ) ( b + c ) ( a + c ) = 0
Therefore, one of the three factors must be zero. Making the substitutions a = x + y b = y + z c = x + z shows us that one of 2 x + y + z x + 2 y + z x + y + 2 z must be zero. Choose one of these without loss of generality and the proof continues as per above.
Log in to reply
You're awesome! How did you think of that first equation?
Log in to reply
The substitutions to a, b, and c should be pretty easy to imagine trying.
The refactoring into ( a + b ) ( b + c ) ( a + c ) takes a little bit more intuition in my opinion. If you tried to play around with symmetric sums and products, you can try looking for relationships between various combinations.
We notice that due to the symmetry, all of the terms here are of degree 3. The left hand side multiplies two factors of degrees 1 and 2. With that combination of degrees, there isn't much room for any possibilities because symmetry must hold. However, trying to multiply factors with degrees 1, 1, and 1, we can take advantage of the fact that there are three factors here and find a different kind of symmetry, and experimenting leads us to see the relationship.
In addition, we know trying something like ( a + b + c ) ( a + b + c ) ( a + b + c ) also doesn't help us, since another way we can visualize the patterns is counting the terms/coefficients. Setting all three variables to equal 1 clearly demonstrates why ( a + b + c ) ( a b + b c + a c ) and ( a + b ) ( b + c ) ( a + c ) could possibly be related, while the expression above is much less likely to be similar.
As the order of these products gets higher, it becomes more and more difficult to utilize these cyclic/permutation sums/products, because the coefficients are sometimes difficult to find explicitly. But with lower degrees, the concept of symmetry helps visualize many of these interesting relationships.
Substitute x + y = a , y + z = b , and z + x = c .
Notice that the given information can be rewritten as a 1 + b 1 + c 1 = a b c 1 . Conveniently, this is realized when a = − b . (The main motivation for this observation is that due to Titu's Lemma, a 1 + b 1 + c 1 ≥ a b c 9 . However, Titu's lemma only applies to positive reals, and this prompts the solver to force one of the variables to be negative.
Then, the expression can be rewritten as:
( a b ) 3 + ( b c ) 3 + ( c a ) 3 ( a + b + c ) 6 − a 6 − b 6 − c 6
= ( − a 2 ) 3 + ( − a c ) 3 + ( a c ) 3 ( a − a + c ) 6 − a 6 − ( − a ) 6 − c 6
= − a 6 − ( a c ) 3 + ( a c ) 3 c 6 − c 6 − a 6 − a 6
= − a 6 − 2 a 6
= 2
This is simple,
Define
x + y + z ⇒ t − z 1 + t − x 1 \nonumber + t − y 1 Taking x = 0 makes no ⇒ t ⇒ y 1 + t 1 + t − y 1 ⇒ 2 t 2 ⇒ y = t = 2 t 1 harm = y + z = 2 t 1 = y ( y − t ) = 2 t and z = − t
[ ( x + y ) 3 ( y + z ) 3 ] + [ ( y + z ) 3 ( z + x ) 3 ] + [ ( z + x ) 3 ( x + y ) 3 ] 6 4 ( x + y + z ) 6 − ( x + y ) 6 − ( y + z ) 6 − ( z + x ) 6 \nonumber = 8 t 3 ⋅ t 3 − t 3 ⋅ t 3 − t 3 ⋅ 8 t 3 6 4 t 6 − 6 4 t 6 − t 6 − t 6 \nonumber = t 6 2 t 6 \nonumber = 2
Of course, taking x = 0 means that you're only solving it for a much smaller set of solutions.
why are you allowed to assume x=0?
Log in to reply
All we assumed is that x + y + z = t . And if we assume x = 0 then, the value of t doesn't change and there is no factor of x 1 . So no prob!
@Calvin Lin Sir, solving it for x = 0 reduces the number of variables making it easiest. There is no harm on assuming it right? We really mean to solve problems in the easiest way right?The competitive exam way!
Log in to reply
There is harm in doing so. You may arrive at the answer (because of the unique way that the problem is set up), but you do not have the correct solution.
Log in to reply
Why? Can you explain.
Log in to reply
@Kishore S. Shenoy – As explained, you have arrived at the answer for "when x = 0 ". How do you know that the answer applies for "when x = 1 "? You have not demonstrated that at all.
Instead, you assumed that "if this problem is correctly phrased, then the answer for x = 0 must be the same as the answer for x = 1 ". Had this problem not existed (or if this problem was wrong), would you know what must be the answer for x = 1 ? What about for x = 2 ?
Log in to reply
@Calvin Lin – I believe the corrected statement of the question!!
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Notice that the equation
a 1 + b 1 + c 1 = a + b + c 1
can be rewritten as
( a + b + c ) ( a b + b c + a c ) = a b c
We then notice that
( a + b + c ) ( a b + b c + a c ) − a b c = ( a + b ) ( b + c ) ( a + c ) = 0
Therefore, one of the three factors must be zero. Making the substitutions a = x + y b = y + z c = x + z shows us that one of 2 x + y + z x + 2 y + z x + y + 2 z must be zero. Choose one of these without loss of generality and the proof continues as per above.
While the problem is beautiful to solve the "real way", there is a way to cheat the solution, and that is to simply find any values of x, y, and z that satisfy the first equation and plug into the second equation.
The substitution a = x+y, b = y+z, c = x+z helps make finding these values even easier.
x = 2, y = 0, z = -1