Let a , b , c be non-negative reals such that a + b + c = 3 . If for all k ≥ t (both are positive reals), a k + b k + c k ≥ a b + b c + c a holds true for all a , b , c , find the minimum value of ⌊ 1 9 9 9 t ⌋ .
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.
Wow, that's a long solution, really. Thanks though :D
I should've tried harder on this question. I just achieved the same result by simply applying the AM-GM inequality after assuming all three variables were nonzero, and then assuming only one of them was zero. (If two of them are zero, then the inequality is trivially true because 3 k ≥ 0 .) Nice solution, nonetheless.
Log in to reply
Actually, I used some calculus, too.
Log in to reply
Here's an outline of what I did. I first examined the case when all three variables were positive. I found the minimum of the LHS using the AM-GM inequality, which was 3. Then I found the maximum of the RHS by setting the partial derivatives equal to zero. The result was also 3. This means the inequality held in this case for any value of k . Then I set one of the variables to zero, and found the minimum of the LHS, again using AM-GM. The result was 2 ∗ ( 2 3 ) k . And the maximum of the RHS was 4 9 . Then one sees that they are equal when k = l o g 1 . 5 1 . 2 5 ; and since the exponential function increases monotonically, this k -value is the minimum.
Log in to reply
@James Wilson – Lol bruh, you could've solved it :D
This is lengthy but important. In real life we don’t have functions which are like those given in Olympiad exams. We cannot use some elementary tricks to get things done. Here there is no option other than using Lagrange multipliers. But interesting thing about this problem is we have two cases when all are positive and the other when one is zero. Nice solution.
How did you draw those beautiful curves. What software did you use?
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Start by considering the function f k ( a ) = a k + ( 3 − a ) k − a ( 3 − a ) 0 ≤ a ≤ 3 for any k > 0 .
If k > 1 then, for any 0 < a < 3 , f k ′ ( a ) = k ( a k − 1 − ( 3 − a ) k − 1 ) + a − ( 3 − a ) = ( 2 a − 3 ) [ k ( k − 1 ) u k − 2 + 1 ] for some u between a and 3 − a (using the Mean Value Theorem). Thus we deduce that f k ′ ( a ) < 0 for 0 < a < 2 3 , while f k ′ ( a ) > 0 for 2 3 < a < 3 , and hence f k ( a ) is minimized at a = 2 3 . Additionally, if k = 1 then f k ( a ) = 3 − a ( 3 − a ) is also minimized at a = 2 3 .
If 0 < k < 1 then since f k ′ ( a ) f k ′ ′ ( a ) f k ′ ′ ′ ( a ) = k [ a k − 1 − ( 3 − a ) k − 1 ] + 2 a − 3 = k ( k − 1 ) [ a k − 2 + ( 3 − a ) k − 2 ] + 2 = k ( k − 1 ) ( k − 2 ) [ a k − 3 − ( 3 − a ) k − 3 ] we see that f k ′ ′ ′ ( a ) has a unique zero at a = 2 3 , and hence that f k ′ ′ ( a ) has a global maximum at 2 3 . Since ( 3 2 ) 2 − k f k ′ ′ ( 2 3 ) = 2 [ ( 3 2 ) 2 − k + k ( k − 1 ) ] ≥ 2 [ ( 3 2 ) 2 − 4 1 ] > 0 we deduce that this global maximum is positive. Thus we can obtain the following sketches for the graphs of f k ′ ′ ′ , f k ′ ′ , f k ′ , f k , from which it is clear that f k achieves its global minimum at a = 2 3 .
Thus f k ( a ) ≥ f k ( 2 3 ) = 2 ( 2 3 ) k − 4 9 0 ≤ a ≤ 3 , k > 0 and so we see that f k ( a ) ≥ 0 for all 0 ≤ a ≤ 3 provided that k ≥ κ = lo g 1 . 5 1 . 1 2 5 .
Now consider the general function F k ( a , b , c ) = a k + b k + c k − a b − a c − b c subject to the constraints a , b , c ≥ 0 and a + b + c = 3 . A minimum of F k on the boundary of this domain corresponds to a minimum of f k , and hence is nonnegative precisely when k ≥ κ . We need to consider the extremal points of F k at interior points of the constraint domain. At such a point, the method of Lagrange multipliers tells us that there must exist λ such that ⎝ ⎛ k a k − 1 − b − c k b k − 1 − a − c k c k − 1 − a − b ⎠ ⎞ = λ ⎝ ⎛ 1 1 1 ⎠ ⎞ and hence that g k ( a ) = g k ( b ) = g k ( c ) = λ + 3 where g k ( x ) = k x k − 1 + x for 0 < x < 3 .
If k ≥ 1 then g k ′ ( x ) = k ( k − 1 ) x k − 2 + 1 > 0 for all 0 < x < 3 , and hence g k is an increasing function of x , Thus we deduce that a = b = c = 1 , and F k ( 1 , 1 , 1 ) = 0 .
If 0 < k < 1 then we see that g k ′ ( x ) = 0 at the unique point λ k = [ k ( 1 − k ) ] 2 − k 1 , noting that 0 < λ k < 1 . Moreover g k is strictly decreasing for x < λ k , and strictly increasing for x > λ k . Thus, for any suitable μ , there are at most 2 distinct points a between 0 and 3 for which g k ( a ) = μ . Thus we have three cases to consider:
Thus we deduce that, for any 0 < k < 1 , the only extrema of F k , subject to the constraints a , b , c > 0 and a + b + c = 3 , are non-negative.
In summary, then, the inequality a k + b k + c k ≥ a b + b c + a c holds for all a , b , c ≥ 0 such that a + b + c = 3 precisely when k ≥ κ = lo g 1 . 5 1 . 1 2 5 . This makes the desired answer ⌊ 1 9 9 9 κ ⌋ = 5 8 0 .