AM-GM Inequality - Troubles with an example

In summary: I don't understand what you mean.In summary, the author is trying to solve an equation that is not explicitly stated, but they are able to do so with some help from a previous equation. The first equation states that for a given set of real numbers, the least possible value of a+b is greater than the sum of the individual numbers. The author takes this example and applies it to a homework problem. They look for an inequality that can be solved with a few properties of the numbers involved. The inequality they are able to find is that for any two numbers, the sum of their divisors is greater than the number itself. This inequality allows them to solve for the least possible value of a+b. They are able to
  • #1
Kolmin
66
0

Homework Statement



Let ##a## and ##b## real numbers such that ##a>b>0##.

Determine the least possible value of ##a+ \frac{1}{b(a-b)}##

I took this example from page 3 of this paper

Homework Equations



In the article previously linked, explaining the example, the author writes down:

[itex]a+ \frac{1}{b(a-b)}=(a-b)+b+\frac{1}{b(a-b)}[/itex]

Now, where does that come from?

The Attempt at a Solution



As the title says, at least I am aware of what the topic is... (!). So everything moves around the AM-GM inequality.

[itex]\frac{a_1 + \dots + a_n}{n} \geq \sqrt[n]{a_1 \dots a_n}[/itex]

I have to admit I have some troubles figuring out what's going on here, so it's not a matter of solving something, it's more about showing why I don't see the solution.

I tried to manipulate a bit the first formula, but it's not about that I guess, cause I really cannot see how the equality in 2. stands.

So, I am looking forward to any feedback. Thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Try moving the parens around on the RHS, you should be able to see the equality.
 
  • #3
Integral said:
Try moving the parens around on the RHS, you should be able to see the equality.

Jeez. That's really bad... completely mathematically blind.
I am quite ashamed of myself. :redface:

Now that I see that 2+2=4, I have some problems that I am afraid will be challenging like 3+3=?.

There are some questions I have related with other things I don't understand.

1) Why do we need to use that trick I didn't understand? Why do we need it?
2) Why in the LHS we have a 3 before the root? From that 3, it seems that the GM formula should be ##n \sqrt[n]{a_1 \dots a_n}##.
3) In other words, why do we need 3 elements?
4) Last dumb question, why are ##b##, ##(a-b)## and ##1/b(a-b)## our three elements? Shouldn't they be ##a## and ##b##?

I guess that now it's clear that I have a real problem with inequalities.
 
  • #4
Ok, correct me if I am wrong.
I think I see now what's going on here.

1) we build up that trick I couldn't see to get rid of everything under the root in the GM side;
2) we have a 3 in the LHS cause it comes from the AM in the RHS;
3) yeah, we do need three elements to implement that trick on 1.;
4) no, the elements are indeed three.

Did I guess it right? :smile:
 
  • #5
Random question here : what ensure that the solution 3 is the LEAST possible solution?
 

FAQ: AM-GM Inequality - Troubles with an example

What is the AM-GM Inequality?

The AM-GM Inequality is a mathematical concept that states that the arithmetic mean (AM) of a set of numbers is always greater than or equal to the geometric mean (GM) of the same set of numbers. In simpler terms, it means that the average of a group of numbers is always greater than or equal to the square root of their product.

How is the AM-GM Inequality used in real life?

The AM-GM Inequality has various applications in fields such as economics, physics, and engineering. For example, it can be used to optimize production processes, minimize costs, and find the most efficient solutions to various problems.

Can you provide an example of the AM-GM Inequality?

Sure, let's say we have the numbers 2, 3, and 5. The arithmetic mean of these numbers is (2+3+5)/3 = 3.33, while the geometric mean is √(2x3x5) = 3.84. As you can see, the arithmetic mean is smaller than the geometric mean, proving the AM-GM Inequality.

What are some common mistakes when using the AM-GM Inequality?

One common mistake is using it on negative numbers. The AM-GM Inequality only applies to positive numbers. Another mistake is trying to compare sets of numbers with different sizes or types (e.g. comparing the arithmetic mean of 3 numbers to the geometric mean of 4 numbers).

Are there any other similar inequalities to the AM-GM Inequality?

Yes, there are other inequalities such as the Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality, the Rearrangement Inequality, and the Power Mean Inequality. These inequalities have similar concepts and are often used in conjunction with the AM-GM Inequality in mathematical proofs and problem-solving.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
975
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
3K
Back
Top