Can the Lever Rule be Modified for a Three-Component Problem?

  • Thread starter Thread starter vin300
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Lever
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether the Lever Rule can be adapted for problems involving three components. A specific problem is presented where a quantity of 12,500 units is to be divided into three parts, with each part representing a percentage of the total. The equations derived from the problem indicate that there are two linear equations with three variables, leading to an infinite number of solutions. The calculations show that the values for each part can be expressed in terms of one variable, with constraints ensuring all parts remain positive. Ultimately, the conclusion is that such problems typically yield infinite results, which complicates finding a unique solution.
vin300
Messages
602
Reaction score
4
Is it possible or not to solve the typical kind of problem given more than two components; take this self made problem: A quantity measuring 12500 units be divided into three parts such that 15% first, 20% second and 30% third amount to 25% original, that is 3125. What would be each divided value? I'm only looking for a solution as simple as two-component problem, nevertheless may try until some level of difficulty.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
vin300 said:
Is it possible or not to solve the typical kind of problem given more than two components; take this self made problem: A quantity measuring 12500 units be divided into three parts such that 15% first, 20% second and 30% third amount to 25% original, that is 3125. What would be each divided value? I'm only looking for a solution as simple as two-component problem, nevertheless may try until some level of difficulty.
If I understand this correctly, you will have two linear equations with three variables, and the condition that the three variables are positive. This kind of problems normally can have an infinite number of solutions.

In your example, you have
a+b+c=12500
15a+20b+30c=312500
a>0, b>0, c>0

You can solve the two equations for b and c in terms of a, and then get bounds for a by requiring that a>0, b>0, c>0.
The solutions are (if I didn't make a computation error):
b=6250-3a/2
c=6250+a/2
Requiring b>0 gives 0<a<4166.66
 
Yes I did reckon in a few hours time that this kind will produce infinite results, and also explains why it remained unseen. So sorry for the waste of time.
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...
Back
Top