Maximum Sum from $\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} + \frac{1}{r}: Help Needed!

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter recon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Maximum Sum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the maximum sum of the form \(\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} + \frac{1}{r}\) where \(p\), \(q\), and \(r\) are positive integers, constrained to be less than 1 but greater than 0. The scope includes mathematical reasoning and exploration of potential solutions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions whether a solution exists at all.
  • Another suggests that brute force might not be effective but considers it a valid approach with limited sums to check.
  • A participant proposes that the relationship \(pq + qr + rp\) should be close to \(pqr\) but less than it, indicating a complex interaction between the variables.
  • Several participants present specific sums, such as \(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{4} + \frac{1}{5} = \frac{19}{20}\) and \(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{7} = \frac{41}{42}\), as potential candidates for the maximum sum.
  • One participant suggests rewriting the problem to maximize the sum of reciprocals for a fixed \(r\), indicating that for \(r > 7\), the optimal values for \(p\) and \(q\) are \(2\) and \(3\).
  • Another participant attempts to clarify an earlier statement about the relationships between the sums and their constraints.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the existence of a solution and the methods to find the maximum sum. Some agree on specific sums being contenders, while others challenge the validity of certain approaches or calculations. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the values of \(p\), \(q\), and \(r\), as well as the dependence on specific integer combinations. The mathematical steps and relationships discussed are not fully resolved, leaving open questions about the validity of certain claims.

recon
Messages
399
Reaction score
1
What is the maximum sum less than 1 but more than 0 that can be formed from [tex]\frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} + \frac{1}{r}[/tex], where p, q and r are positive integers?

I posted this problem in the homework forum even though it isn't homework. Since I have not yet received any help, I have posted it here.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I'm not sure there is a solution.
 
Is there a way of proving this then?
 
Brute force doesn't work?
 
1/2 +1/4 + 1/5 = 19/20

edited to add: yes brute force is the way, but you onluy need actually consider about 5 or so different sums once you've excluded the ones thta cannot possibly be the correct answer. For example the fact that 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/5 > 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 implies that at least one term must be greater than 1/4.
 
Last edited:
If you rearrange this you can show you want pq + qr + rp to be as close as possible to pqr but such that pq + qr + rp < pqr. Can't say my maths is good enough to think about 3 independent variables like this.

But it would seem to me if you could up with some functions p(t), q(t) and r(t) such that p(t)q(t) + q(t)r(t) + r(t)p(t) monotonically increases and so does p(t)q(t)r(t) and that p(t)q(t) + q(t)r(t) + r(t)p(t) < p(t)q(t)r(t) holds true for all [itex]p(t), q(t), r(t) \in \mathBB{N}[/itex] then that is proof there is no solution.

Not very useful I know I'm sorry.
 
1/2 +1/4 + 1/5 = 19/20

I can do better!
 
jcsd said:
1/2 +1/4 + 1/5 = 19/20

edited to add: yes brute force is the way, but you onluy need actually consider about 5 or so different sums once you've excluded the ones thta cannot possibly be the correct answer. For example the fact that 1/2 + 1/4 + 1/5 > 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 implies that at least one term must be greater than 1/4.
p=7
q=3
r=2

Is closer
 
How about [tex]\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{3} + \frac{1}{7}~~?[/tex]

Edit : didn't see zurtex's post.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Hurkyl said:
I can do better!

hmm let's try again:
oops yes, I actually did consider: 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7 = 41/42, but I added it up wrong:blushing:

edited to add:

Here's the proof then tthat this is indeedf the largets possible answer.

As I said earlier we already know that at least one term must be greater than 1/4:

2/3 + 2/3 + 1/4 < 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7 therefore at leats one term muct be a 1/2

As 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/6 > 1 and 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7 < 1, the rest of the terms must be less than or equal to 1/3 and gretare than or equal to 1/7

which means only the sums:

1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7

1/2 + 1/4 + 1/5

1/2 + 1/6 + 1/6

need be considered of them the greaest is 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7.

edited again to add: looks like Gokul beat me to it.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Re-write the problem as follows :
For a given value of r, find p, q that maximizes the sum of reciprocals subject to it being less than 1.

If r> 7, need maximal 1/p + 1/q < (r-1)/r.

This is achieved with p=2, q=3 for all such r, since :
1/2 + 1/3 < 7/8 => 1/2 + 1/3 < (r-1)/r , for all r>7
AND
the next larger value of 1/p + 1/q = 1/2 + 1/2, which is clearly not allowed, as the sum will exceed 1.

Thus the maximal solution for any r>7 is 1/2, 1/3, 1/r

Clearly, any of these solutions is inferior to 1/2, 1/3, 1/7.

This leaves you with only having to check r=5,6.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
jcsd said:
2/3 + 2/3 + 1/4 < 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7 therefore at leats one term muct be a 1/2

What should this equation really read like?
 
  • #13
recon said:
What should this equation really read like?
I think:

1/3 + 1/3 + 1/4 < 1/2 + 1/3 + 1/7
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
48
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K