sankalpmittal said:
See post #5 . Question corrected to extent .
In Q :
40 l of acid + x/2 l of water - x/2 l of acid .
In P :
50 l of water - x/2 l of water + x/2 l of acid .
After this what ?
Try some actual numbers [ and hopefully not happen upon the correct answer ] just to see how it works. To dive straight into x is really quite advanced - especially if this is the first such problem you have done.
For example let the sample be 40 litres from each - all of the smaller [acid] container. [ie x = 40]
After mixing and replacing, you now have 20 litres of acid in each.
The 40 litre container is 20 litres of water plus 20 litres of acid, the 50 litre beaker is 30 / 20.
Now you again take 40 litres from each [1st repeat]
You get 20 lites of water plus 20 litres of acid from the 40l beaker [everything again] and 40l from the 50 litre pot which is 60% water / 40% acid so 24 litres of water - 16 litres of acid.
mix together and the 80 litres is 44 litres water - 36 litres acid
So you now return 22l water - 18l acid to each beaker
The 50 litre beaker already had the remaining 6 l water and 4 l acid to make a new mix of 28 l water and 22 l acid. The 40 litre container is just re-filled with the 22-18 mix.
Now you do it again - you calculate this time.
You will then end up with a certain amount of acid /water in each beaker.
If you keep track of what has been happening to the original 40, you can then do those same things to the general sample size, x.
For example, after the first sample - mix - replace cycle, there is x/2 litres of acid in the water and x/2 litres of water in the acid.
Work through a couple of times with numbers if necessary, and you should see how this works. For example let x = 6,10,14 or 22 - each of those is 2 times a prime. We know we are going to halve the first time, so we may as well choose an even number to make that work. From there on you will be doing something to a prime number, so should be able to keep track of what is happening.
[For example if we chose 8, it would become 4 after the first operation. If it became 2 after the second, we wouldn't know if it had been halved or "square rooted"]
Peter