We use cookies to personalise content and advertisements and to analyse access to our website. Furthermore, our partners for online advertising receive pseudonymised information about your use of our website. cookie policy and privacy policy.
 
+0  
 
0
197
15
avatar

Let \(x\)\(y\), and \(z\) be real numbers such that \(x+y+z\)\(xy+xz+yz\), and \(xyz\) are all positive.

Prove that \(x\)\(y\), and \(z\) all positive.

 Mar 12, 2019
edited by Guest  Mar 12, 2019
 #1
avatar+234 
+2

If they are all negative, then x + y + z would be negative, regardless of the values. Since xyz is positive, two of them aren't negative because a negative times a negative is a positive, and we've already ruled out the option of three. Since xy + xz + yz is positive, one isn't negative. Let's say x is the negative one. (It doesn't matter which one we choose because they appear at the same rate) If x is negative, then no matter the values of y and z, it will be negative because you're multiplying them by x. If you factor out the x, you get x( y + z) + yz. So whatever the value of y and z, it will be smaller than x(y + z). This rules out the one option. Sorry I can't explain the third part too well I don't think, It's a little hard to communicate the idea I had.

 

Hope this helps!

 Mar 12, 2019
edited by LagTho  Mar 12, 2019
 #2
avatar
0

It didn't help.

Guest Mar 12, 2019
 #3
avatar+234 
+1

For example, if you have xy + xz -yz, no matter what you have for y and z, it will always be positive right? So reverse the signs, and you have xy - xz + yz, it will always be negative. So if x is negative, then xy + xz + yz will always be negative. So going through it, we've ruled out there being one negative variable, two, and three. So all of them must be positive.

LagTho  Mar 12, 2019
 #5
avatar
+1

It still doesn't help.

Guest Mar 12, 2019
 #8
avatar+101751 
0

It didn't help me either.  It is good that you had a go LagTho  but i think there are errors in your logic.

Melody  Mar 12, 2019
 #9
avatar+234 
+1

Yeah, that's definitely possible, I've found that my methods are often unorthodox, and sometimes require some assuming. Sorry I couldn't be more help! Good job Guest for solving it!

LagTho  Mar 12, 2019
 #10
avatar+27912 
0

I think Lag Tho's reasoning is correct, though his explanation might have been a little cumbersome!

Alan  Mar 12, 2019
 #12
avatar+101751 
0

What about this statement Alan.

"Since xyz is positive, two of them aren't negative because a negative times a negative is a positive, and we've already ruled out the option of three."

If we had          a negative * a negative * a postitive then    xyz would be positive and that is what we want.

Melody  Mar 12, 2019
 #15
avatar+27912 
+1

You’re right.  The explanation was even more confusing than I first thought!

Alan  Mar 12, 2019
edited by Alan  Mar 12, 2019
 #4
avatar
+4

Let \(x\), \(y\), and \(z\) be the roots of \(f(t)=at^3+bt^2+ct+d\). We can divide by \(a\) on both sides here because it doesn't affect the roots. This gives us
\(\frac{f(t)}{a}=t^3+\frac{b}{a}t^2+\frac{c}{a}t+\frac{d}{a}.\)
By Vieta's Formulas, \(x+y+z=-\frac{b}{a}\), \(xy + xz + yz=\frac{c}{a}\), and \(xyz=-\frac{d}{a}\). Since \(x + y + z\), \(xy + xz + yz\), and \(xyz\) are all positive, \(\frac{b}{a}\) must be negative, \(\frac{c}{a}\) must be positive, and \(\frac{d}{a}\) must be negative. 
For \(\frac{f(t)}{a}=0\)\(t\) has to be positive. This is because if \(t\) was negative, \(t^3\) would be negative, \(\frac{b}{a}t^2\) would be negative (\(t^2\) is positive but \(\frac{b}{a}\) is negative), \(\frac{c}{a}t\) would be negative, and \(\frac{d}{a}\) would be negative so \(\frac{f(t)}{a}\) would have to be negative. If \(t\) was \(0\)\(t^3\) would be \(0\), \(\frac{b}{a}t^2\) would be \(0\), \(\frac{c}{a}t\) would be \(0\), and \(\frac{d}{a}\) would be negative so \(\frac{f(t)}{a}\) would still be negative. Therefore, the only way for \(\frac{f(t)}{a}=0\) is for \(t\) to be positve. This means that all of \(f(t)\)'s roots (which are the same as \(\frac{f(t)}{a}\)'s roots) are positive so \(x, y,\) and \(z\) are all positive.

 Mar 12, 2019
 #6
avatar
0

Thank you!

Guest Mar 12, 2019
 #7
avatar
0

That's a more helpful answer!

Guest Mar 12, 2019
 #14
avatar+101751 
0

Thanks guest. :)

Melody  Mar 12, 2019
 #11
avatar
+2

Proof will be by contradiction, that is, we show that not just one of x, y, z can be negative, nor can just two of them be negative nor all three negative, leaving the only possibility that all three are positive.

 

If just one of x, y, z is negative then the product xyz would be negative, which is a contradiction.

If all three of x, y, z are negative, then the sum x + y + z would be negative, which again is a contradiction.

 

That leaves only the possibility that precisely two of the three are negative.

Suppose that, wlog, \(x = -u^{2}, \text{ and }y = -v^{2},\text{ with }z>0.\)

then, since x + y + z > 0, we have \(-u^{2}-v^{2}+z>0, \text{ so }z > u^{2}+v^{2}\dots(1).\)

From the second condition, 

\(\displaystyle u^{2}v^{2}-u^{2}z-v^{2}z>0,\text{ so }\:u^{2}v^{2}>z(u^{2}+v^{2})\text{ and }\:\frac{u^{2}v^{2}}{u^{2}+v^{2}}>z\dots(2).\)

From (1) and (2), 

\(\displaystyle \frac{u^{2}v^{2}}{u^{2}+v^{2}}>z>u^{2}+v^{2}, \text{ so }\)

\(\displaystyle u^{2}v^{2}>(u^{2}+v^{2})^{2}=u^{4}+v^{4}+2u^{2}v^{2}\)

again a contradiction, forcing the conclusion that all three are positive.

 

Tiggsy

 Mar 12, 2019
 #13
avatar+101751 
0

Thanks Tiggsy.

I do wish you would get yourself an account.

I have often want to look back at your contributions and I can't.

If you had posted under username it would be easy for me to do.  

Melody  Mar 12, 2019

6 Online Users

avatar