You are not logged in.
Supposing a was large and b,c were small? I do not know if that step is rigorous enough or requires more.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
You are forgeting one thing which might be crucial. a, b and c are sides of a triangle. There is a great chance that has some other purpose than just stating that a, b and c are positive.
Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.
Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
The knowledge of some things as a function of age is a delta function.
Offline
One property is
a + b > c
a + c > b
b + c > a
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
Exactly what I had in mind. I will try to do the problem.
Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.
Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
The knowledge of some things as a function of age is a delta function.
Offline
hi
But a, b, c all > 0
Similarly
Bob
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
hi
But a, b, c all > 0
Similarly
Bob
Thanks for this, I didn't think about setting c(b+a) > 0... so, would all my reasoning be mathematically sound? I agree with what you have written above -- I'm wondering if a geometric solution is also possible however, since it appears that this solution doesn't take advantage of any triangle properties...
hi zetafunc
Your post with (a+1)(b+1)(c+1) = 4 + (a-1)(b-1)(c-1) is the way to go with this.
But you just needed to justify a,b,c all < 1
I experimented using Sketchpad with a number of values for a b and c and found
it doesn't hold if a b c are not the sides of a triangle and the expression = 4 when any of a b or c = 1. (and is > 4 if over 1)
So the two constraints (triangle and ab + bc + ca = 1) are necessary.
Therefore you have to use a property of triangles.
My contribution uses b < a + c
Bob
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
How'd you get 2b<b(a+c)? It would imply that a+c>2, so one of them has to be greater than 1...
Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.
Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
The knowledge of some things as a function of age is a delta function.
Offline
Arhh! Once more you have spotted my error. Curses. (not aimed at you of course!)
My brain did this.
triangle property
b < a + c and b(a+c) < 2 .... => 2b < 2.
But it was wishful thinking.
I should have written b^2 < 2 which is not any help. Sorry zetafunc. Back to the drawing board.
Bob
ps. Nevertheless, some triangle property seems essential here.
Children are not defined by school ...........The Fonz
You cannot teach a man anything; you can only help him find it within himself..........Galileo Galilei
Sometimes I deliberately make mistakes, just to test you! …………….Bob
Offline
It's okay. For I second there I thought we finally had proof!
Here lies the reader who will never open this book. He is forever dead.
Taking a new step, uttering a new word, is what people fear most. ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky, Crime and Punishment
The knowledge of some things as a function of age is a delta function.
Offline
Hi zetafunc.;
a(b + c) + bc = 1
b(a + c) + ca = 1
c(a + b) + ab = 1
You were on the right track when you posted that.
You need to prove that a,b,c <1.
Let's assume WLOG that a>1 then
By the triangle inequality
If a>1 then (b+c) > 1 and a(b+c) >1 but bc cannot be less than or equal to 0 ( see equation 2 ) so we have a contradiction. Therefore a,b,c<1
Now put your proof all together and present it.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline
I see now. Thank you.
I suppose the proof would look like this:
Hi;
Yes, that is what I would do. If it is wrong then at least you have company.
In mathematics, you don't understand things. You just get used to them.
If it ain't broke, fix it until it is.
Always satisfy the Prime Directive of getting the right answer above all else.
Offline