AM-GM Inequality - Troubles with an example

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the AM-GM inequality and its application to a specific expression involving real numbers \(a\) and \(b\) where \(a > b > 0\). The original poster seeks to determine the least possible value of the expression \(a + \frac{1}{b(a-b)}\) and is exploring the reasoning behind a manipulation of the expression as presented in a referenced paper.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to understand the manipulation of the expression and its connection to the AM-GM inequality. They express confusion about the equality presented in the referenced article and seek feedback on their understanding. Other participants suggest examining the arrangement of terms to clarify the equality. The original poster raises several questions regarding the necessity of certain elements in the inequality and the reasoning behind the number of terms used.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants engaging in clarifying the manipulation of the expression and addressing the original poster's questions. Some participants have provided feedback, and the original poster appears to be reflecting on their understanding of the concepts involved.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses uncertainty about their grasp of inequalities and the specific application of the AM-GM inequality in this context. There is an acknowledgment of confusion regarding the elements involved in the inequality and the reasoning behind their selection.

Kolmin
Messages
66
Reaction score
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:

a+ \frac{1}{b(a-b)}=(a-b)+b+\frac{1}{b(a-b)}

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.

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

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
Try moving the parens around on the RHS, you should be able to see the equality.
 
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.
 
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:
 
Random question here : what ensure that the solution 3 is the LEAST possible solution?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K