A problem about logarithmic inequality

In summary: If a=b=c=1 then the logarithms are not defined. So there is an error in the book's problem. It is possible that a,b,c are close to 1, but without being equal to 1. The statement of the problem should read, if a,b,c positive real and close to 1, then prove the inequalities. It is possible for a,b,c to be different and still have the logs equal. You could also start with the logs equal and see what restrictions you get on a,b,c. I did not do the proof in its entirety, so I don't know what can be shown.In summary, the given problem
  • #1
ubergewehr273
142
5

Homework Statement


If a,b,c are positive real numbers such that ##{loga}/(b-c) = {logb}/(c-a)={logc}/(a-b)## then prove that
(a) ##a^{b+c} + b^{c+a} + c^{a+b} >= 3##
(b) ##a^a + b^b + c^c >=3##

Homework Equations


A.M ##>=## G.M

The Attempt at a Solution


Using the above inequation, I am able to get (b) but I have no idea to do (a) keeping in mind the exponents as a sum whereas in the question the denominators are as a difference.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It doesn't look like a one or two step problem, but I did get the result from the set of logarithmic equations (by combining a couple of them) that abc=1. It does appear when a=b=c=1 that the equality holds. For any other case, you then need to show that the "greater than" sign applies.
 
  • #3
Charles Link said:
It doesn't look like a one or two step problem, but I did get the result from the set of logarithmic equations (by combining a couple of them) that abc=1. It does appear when a=b=c=1 that the equality holds. For any other case, you then need to show that the "greater than" sign applies.

It is not allowed to have ##a = b = 1## (or even ##a = b = c \neq 1##) because that would involve division by zero in the constraint
[tex] \log(a)/(b-c) = \log(b)/(c-a) = \log(c)/(a-b) [/tex]
Even trying to take limits as ##a \to 1##, ##b \to 1## and ##c \to 1## will not really work, because depending on exactly how those limits are taken, the quantities involved in the constraint can still fail to exist, or can exist but have more-or-less arbitrary values.
 
  • #4
Ray Vickson said:
It is not allowed to have ##a = b = 1## (or even ##a = b = c \neq 1##) because that would involve division by zero in the constraint
[tex] \log(a)/(b-c) = \log(b)/(c-a) = \log(c)/(a-b) [/tex]
Even trying to take limits as ##a \to 1##, ##b \to 1## and ##c \to 1## will not really work, because depending on exactly how those limits are taken, the quantities involved in the constraint can still fail to exist, or can exist but have more-or-less arbitrary values.
The use of the "logs" to state the problem appears to be largely algebraic. After processing these equations, the result emerges that abc=1 and the logs wind up being removed. The problem could actually begin with, given a,b, c positive real, such that abc=1, prove the two inequalities. I think you will find that the equality holds only for the case a=b=c=1. I did not do the proof in its entirety, partly because on a homework problem we are not supposed to present the whole solution, but I think the only case where the equal sign would apply is for a=b=c=1. (I agree, this puts a zero in the denominators of the original statement of the problem.)
 
  • #5
We may assume that either ##0 < a < b < c## or ##0 < a < c < b##. As @Ray Vickson pointed out they cannot be equal. Neither can one of them equal one for then all of them would be equal one, especially they would be equal.
The rest is simply about cases.
Assume now ##0<a<b<c##. If ##c < 1## then ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log b}{c-a} < 0##, a contradiction.
In the same way ##b < 1## leads to ##\log a < \log b < 0 ## and ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log b}{c-a} < 0##, a contradiction.
If ## a < 1 ## then ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log c}{a-b} < 0##, a contradiction.
This means ##a, b, c > 1## and both assertions are true. (The second case ##0 < a < c < b## should be analogue.)

The principle behind it is the following: The assumption is symmetric in ##(a,b,c),## i.e. with positive signum. On the other side there has to be a change in signs if not all of them are positive factors which means greater than one for the nominators.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
  • #6
Charles Link said:
The use of the "logs" to state the problem appears to be largely algebraic. After processing these equations, the result emerges that abc=1 and the logs wind up being removed. The problem could actually begin with, given a,b, c positive real, such that abc=1, prove the two inequalities. I think you will find that the equality holds only for the case a=b=c=1. I did not do the proof in its entirety, partly because on a homework problem we are not supposed to present the whole solution, but I think the only case where the equal sign would apply is for a=b=c=1. (I agree, this puts a zero in the denominators of the original statement of the problem.)

I suspect that as long as ##a,b,c## are valid (no division by 0) the inequalities to be shown will be strict.
 
  • #7
I will show the algebra that gives the result ## abc=1 ##. Removing the log factors on both sides, ## a^{c-a}=b^{b-c} ## and ## a^{a-b}=c^{b-c} ##. (also ## b^{a-b}=c^{c-a} ##). Taking the first two equations and multiplying left sides and right sides, ## a^{c-b}=(bc)^{b-c} ## so that ## a^{c-b}=1/(bc)^{c-b} ##. Thereby ## (abc)^{c-b}=1 ##. I think it can be concluded that ## abc=1 ##. (You can write similar equations by combining the other pairs of equations also with the result that ## abc=1 ##).The way the problem is written with the factors in the denominators places additional restrictions, but otherwise, it would be possible to have ## a=b=c=1 ##. To proceed from here, I would let ## c=1/(ab) ## and write the inequalities as functions of ## a ## and ## b##. There are basically two cases that need to be tested, ## ab>1 ## and ## ab<1 ##. The way the problem is written yes, if one of the three letters is equal to 1, then all 3 must equal one (log 1=0, etc), but that makes the denominators all zero. Instead of using logs, they could simply have presented the condition ## abc=1 ##. (with a,b, c positive real). In that case, the problem would be less restrictive, but the same inequalities would apply.
 
Last edited:
  • #8
fresh_42 said:
We may assume that either ##0 < a < b < c## or ##0 < a < c < b##. As @Ray Vickson pointed out they cannot be equal. Neither can one of them equal one for then all of them would be equal one, especially they would be equal.
The rest is simply about cases.
Assume now ##0<a<b<c##. If ##c < 1## then ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log b}{c-a} < 0##, a contradiction.
In the same way ##b < 1## leads to ##\log a < \log b < 0 ## and ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log b}{c-a} < 0##, a contradiction.
If ## a < 1 ## then ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} > 0## and ##\frac{\log c}{a-b} < 0##, a contradiction.
This means ##a, b, c > 1## and both assertions are true. (The second case ##0 < a < c < b## should be analogue.)

The principle behind it is the following: The assumption is symmetric in ##(a,b,c),## i.e. with positive signum. On the other side there has to be a change in signs if not all of them are positive factors which means greater than one for the nominators.
If ## a<b<c ## then ## c>1 ##. But ## b ## could be greater than one or less than one, and ## a<1 ##. Please double-check your logic.
 
  • #9
Charles Link said:
If ## a<b<c ## then ## c>1 ##. But ## b ## could be greater than one or less than one, and ## a<1 ##. Please double-check your logic.
The logic is ok, but you are right: there is no solution at all.
Three positive real numbers can be ordered. They cannot be pairwise equal for this meant a division by zero.
Therefore there has to be at least one change of sign in the denominators: ##b-c, c-a, a-b##. To be equal this means there is a change in the sign of the nominators. However, the nominators are somehow linearly ordered, e.g. ##0 < a < b < c,## and the denominators are cyclic. Since the logarithm is strictly monotone, the two orderings cannot be true at the same time.

In your example with ##0 < a < b < c## we get ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} = \frac{\log b}{c-a}=\frac{\log c}{a-b}=\frac{\log a}{-}=\frac{\log b}{+}=\frac{\log c}{-}##. On the other hand ##\log a < \log b < \log c## and the nominator in the middle cannot have a different sign than the two left and right.

The assumption is always wrong.
 
  • Like
Likes Charles Link
  • #10
fresh_42 said:
The logic is ok, but you are right: there is no solution at all.
Three positive real numbers can be ordered. They cannot be pairwise equal for this meant a division by zero.
Therefore there has to be at least one change of sign in the denominators: ##b-c, c-a, a-b##. To be equal this means there is a change in the sign of the nominators. However, the nominators are somehow linearly ordered, e.g. ##0 < a < b < c,## and the denominators are cyclic. Since the logarithm is strictly monotone, the two orderings cannot be true at the same time.

In your example with ##0 < a < b < c## we get ##\frac{\log a}{b-c} = \frac{\log b}{c-a}=\frac{\log c}{a-b}=\frac{\log a}{-}=\frac{\log b}{+}=\frac{\log c}{-}##. On the other hand ##\log a < \log b < \log c## and the nominator in the middle cannot have a different sign than the two left and right.

The assumption is always wrong.
A very good observation. Yes, the problem statement is clearly inconsistent. (unless we are missing the obvious). I agree with your assessment.
 
  • #11
Well that rules out a<b<c, but what about a<c<b?
$$\frac{\log a}{b-c} = \frac{\log b}{c-a}=\frac{\log c}{a-b}=\frac{\log a}{+}=\frac{\log b}{+}=\frac{\log c}{-}$$
Clearly log(c) has a different sign than the others, so 0<a<b<1<c. The equalities are cyclic, but swapping the parity makes a difference.

Edit: no, doesn't work either. c-a is the largest denominator, so log(b) has to be the largest numerator in magnitude, but log(a) is larger.
Both cases are excluded, but the second one is a bit more subtle.
 
  • #12
mfb said:
Well that rules out a<b<c, but what about a<c<b?
$$\frac{\log a}{b-c} = \frac{\log b}{c-a}=\frac{\log c}{a-b}=\frac{\log a}{+}=\frac{\log b}{+}=\frac{\log c}{-}$$
Clearly log(c) has a different sign than the others, so 0<a<b<1<c. The equalities are cyclic, but swapping the parity makes a difference.

Edit: no, doesn't work either. c-a is the largest denominator, so log(b) has to be the largest numerator in magnitude, but log(a) is larger.
Both cases are excluded, but the second one is a bit more subtle.

There is no need to check other cases. The three numbers must all be different. Let's call the smallest of the three ##a##, the largest of the three ##c## and the one in the middle ##b##. In the original problem there were no characteristics distinguishing ##a, b## or ##c##, so there were no a priori ways to distinguish between them. Basically, it is just saying "without loss of generality, assume ##a < b < c##", and we do that type of thing all the time.
 
  • #13
@fresh_42 made a very good observation. I've looked hard to try to find an exception to this that would make it work, but it seems the problem in the way it is formulated is inconsistent. Writing the expressions without the logs: ## a^{1/(b-c)}=b^{1/(c-a)}=c^{1/(a-b)} ## apparently it is impossible for all three terms to be greater than 1 or all three terms to be less than one. If two of them are greater than one, the third must be less than one, etc...
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Okay, checking that in more detail, swapping a and b doesn't change the equalities, but that is not as obvious as an a->b->c->a rotation.
 

1. What is a logarithmic inequality?

A logarithmic inequality is an inequality that involves logarithmic functions. Logarithmic functions are mathematical functions that involve the use of logarithms, which are the inverse of exponential functions. In a logarithmic inequality, the variable is found in the argument of the logarithmic function, and the inequality involves comparing the values of the logarithmic functions on either side of the inequality symbol.

2. How do I solve a logarithmic inequality?

To solve a logarithmic inequality, you need to apply the rules of logarithms and algebra to isolate the variable on one side of the inequality symbol. Then, you can determine the values of the variable that satisfy the inequality by evaluating the logarithmic function at those values. It is important to check the solution to ensure that it is valid and satisfies the given inequality.

3. What are some common applications of logarithmic inequalities?

Logarithmic inequalities have many applications in real-world problems, such as in finance, biology, and physics. For example, they can be used to model population growth, measure sound intensity, and calculate interest rates.

4. What are the key properties of logarithmic inequalities?

Some key properties of logarithmic inequalities include:

  • The domain of a logarithmic function is restricted to positive real numbers.
  • The base of the logarithmic function affects the shape of the graph, but does not change the inequality.
  • The logarithmic function is always increasing, so the inequality symbol remains the same when the argument is multiplied or divided by a positive number.
  • The logarithmic function is always concave down, so the inequality symbol is flipped when the argument is raised to a power greater than 1.

5. What are some tips for solving logarithmic inequalities?

Here are some tips for solving logarithmic inequalities:

  • Isolate the variable on one side of the inequality symbol before evaluating the logarithmic function.
  • Be careful when raising both sides of the inequality to a power, as this may change the direction of the inequality.
  • Remember to check the solution to ensure it is valid and satisfies the given inequality.
  • Practice using the rules of logarithms and algebra to simplify and solve logarithmic inequalities.

Similar threads

  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
19
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • General Math
Replies
1
Views
866
Back
Top