Find the smallest positive integer

  • Thread starter Thread starter youngstudent16
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integer Positive
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves finding the smallest positive integer \( k \geq 2 \) such that the product \( a_2 a_3 \cdots a_k > 4 \), where \( a_n = \frac{1}{n} \sqrt[3]{n^3 + n^2 - n - 1} \). The discussion centers around the behavior of the sequence defined by \( a_n \) and the implications of its growth rate.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants have attempted to compute values of \( a_n \) for various integers \( n \) and noted the slow growth of the product. Some have suggested a brute force approach, while others have proposed setting up inequalities to analyze the problem further. There are discussions about whether the expressions calculated are less than 4 and the utility of decimal approximations.

Discussion Status

Several participants are exploring different methods, including brute force calculations and algebraic manipulation. There is recognition that direct computation may not yield efficient results, and some participants are considering the potential for simplification through algebraic techniques. No consensus has been reached, but various lines of reasoning are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants have noted the constraints of the problem, including the requirement for \( k \) to be a positive integer greater than or equal to 2. There is also mention of the need to analyze the product of the sequence rather than the sum, which has led to some confusion in the discussion.

youngstudent16
Messages
59
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


For a positive integer ##n##, let

##a_n=\frac{1}{n} \sqrt[3]{n^{3}+n^{2}-n-1}##

Find the smallest positive integer ##k \geq2## such that ##a_2a_3\cdots a_k>4##

Homework Equations



The restrictions are the only relevant thing I can think of

The Attempt at a Solution



I have just tried plugging in numbers so far

When ##n=2## I got ##\frac{3^{\frac{2}{3}}}{2}##
When ##n=3## I got ##\frac{2 \times 2^{\frac{2}{3}}}{3}##
When ##n=4## I got ##\frac{1}{4} 3^{\frac{1}{3}} \hspace{1mm} 5^{\frac{2}{3}}##

Now this is growing really slowly so this is obviously not the correct approach.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
youngstudent16 said:

Homework Statement


For a positive integer ##n##, let

##a_n=\frac{1}{n} \sqrt[3]{n^{3}+n^{2}-n-1}##

Find the smallest positive integer ##k \geq2## such that ##a_2a_3\cdots a_k>4##

Homework Equations



The restrictions are the only relevant thing I can think of

The Attempt at a Solution



I have just tried plugging in numbers so far

When ##n=2## I got ##\frac{3^{\frac{2}{3}}}{2}##
When ##n=3## I got ##\frac{2 \times 2^{\frac{2}{3}}}{3}##
When ##n=4## I got ##\frac{1}{4} 3^{\frac{1}{3}} \hspace{1mm} 5^{\frac{2}{3}}##

Now this is growing really slowly so this is obviously not the correct approach.
I would advise you to just keep going. Sometimes, a brute force approach is the easiest way to go. For your results for n = 4, is the expression you show less than 4? Writing the result as a decimal approximation would be helpful.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Student100
youngstudent16 said:

Homework Statement


For a positive integer ##n##, let

##a_n=\frac{1}{n} \sqrt[3]{n^{3}+n^{2}-n-1}##

Find the smallest positive integer ##k \geq2## such that ##a_2a_3\cdots a_k>4##

Homework Equations



The restrictions are the only relevant thing I can think of

The Attempt at a Solution



I have just tried plugging in numbers so far

When ##n=2## I got ##\frac{3^{\frac{2}{3}}}{2}##
When ##n=3## I got ##\frac{2 \times 2^{\frac{2}{3}}}{3}##
When ##n=4## I got ##\frac{1}{4} 3^{\frac{1}{3}} \hspace{1mm} 5^{\frac{2}{3}}##

Now this is growing really slowly so this is obviously not the correct approach.

Set up an inequality.
 
Mark44 said:
I would advise you to just keep going. Sometimes, a brute force approach is the easiest way to go. For your results for n = 4, is the expression you show less than 4? Writing the result as a decimal approximation would be helpful.

Never mind, I'm an idiot. :)
 
Student100 said:
Set up an inequality.
Ok trying to just work with the variables no numbers I'm getting this pattern

##\frac{\sqrt[3]{k-1)(k+1)^2}(k-1)}{k}##
Now I simplify and set up the ineqaulity
##\frac{\sqrt[3]{(2k^2)(k+1)^2}}{2k}>4##

Now what
 
Mark44 said:
I would advise you to just keep going. Sometimes, a brute force approach is the easiest way to go. For your results for n = 4, is the expression you show less than 4? Writing the result as a decimal approximation would be helpful.
I tried putting them with decimal and using wolframalpha I went to 10 numbers and still it was tiny
 
youngstudent16 said:
Ok trying to just work with the variables no numbers I'm getting this pattern

##\frac{\sqrt[3]{k-1)(k+1)^2}(k-1)}{k}##
Now I simplify and set up the ineqaulity
##\frac{\sqrt[3]{(2k^2)(k+1)^2}}{2k}>4##

Now what

I misread your question:
## a _2+a _3 + ... a _k ##
Whats the sum of your brute force method? You are summing them correct?
 
Student100 said:
I misread your question:
## a _2+a _3 + ... a _k ##
Whats the sum of your brute force method? You are summing them correct?
Its multiplying not summing and yes I tried brute force now using wolframalpha for several numbers and its going up very slowly like 1.01 1..., 1..., 1... etc
 
youngstudent16 said:
Its multiplying not summing and yes I tried brute force now using wolframalpha for several numbers and its going up very slowly like 1.01 1..., 1..., 1... etc

Okay, well then as long as you set up your inequality right have you tried punching it into a calculator/wolfram and seeing if a solution exists? Picking various k's and working it out?
 
  • #10
youngstudent16 said:
##\frac{\sqrt[3]{(2k^2)(k+1)^2}}{2k}>4##

Now what
You've done the hard work. Just cube both sides, multiply out and simplify.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: youngstudent16
  • #11
As it turns out, brute force and direct calculation with paper and pencil don't work very well for this problem. You can, however, use brute force and a computer to find the answer. I put together an Excel spreadsheet that shows that when n is about 250, the product finally gets to 4.

The first two rows of my spreadsheet look like this:
Code:
 2 | 1/A1 * (A1^3 + A1^2 - A1 - 1)^(1/3) | =B1
=A1 + 1 | 1/A2 * (A2^3 + A2^2 - A2 - 1)^(1/3) | =B2 * C1

I just copied the second row (all three columns) down a bunch of rows.
 
  • #12
Mark44 said:
As it turns out, brute force and direct calculation with paper and pencil don't work very well for this problem. You can, however, use brute force and a computer to find the answer. I put together an Excel spreadsheet that shows that when n is about 250, the product finally gets to 4.

The first two rows of my spreadsheet look like this:
Code:
 2 | 1/A1 * (A1^3 + A1^2 - A1 - 1)^(1/3) | =B1
=A1 + 1 | 1/A2 * (A2^3 + A2^2 - A2 - 1)^(1/3) | =B2 * C1

I just copied the second row (all three columns) down a bunch of rows.
It's not at all difficult algebraically. Look at where youngstudent got to in post #5.
 
  • #13
youngstudent16 said:
Ok trying to just work with the variables no numbers I'm getting this pattern

##\frac{\sqrt[3]{k-1)(k+1)^2}(k-1)}{k}##
Now I simplify and set up the ineqaulity
##\frac{\sqrt[3]{(2k^2)(k+1)^2}}{2k}>4##

Now what
I'm not sure that's quite right.
Go back to the expression inside the cube root in ##a_n##. Notice that it factorises to ##(n^2-1)(n+1)=(n-1)(n+1)^2##.
Next, bring the ##n## in the denominator inside the cube root, by cubing it. That gives us
$${a_n}^3=\frac{(n-1)(n+1)^2}{n^3}$$

Hence the inequality you want to prove is:

$$4^3=64< \prod_{k=2}^n \frac{(k-1)(k+1)^2}{k^3}$$

Look carefully at the inside of the product. Notice how the power in the denominator is 3 and the numerator has the 1st power of the previous factor and the 2nd power of the next factor. Does that give you an idea about some really nice simplifying cancellation that is going to happen between adjacent factors?

Try writing out a few factors in a row like this and you'll get an idea of the cancellation, which will lead you towards a simple guessed expression for the product, in which everything cancels out except a few bits from the first and last factors. You can then use mathematical induction to prove that that expression is the correct one for each product.

Once you have that expression, solving the inequality is easy. It should be an inequality involving only polynomials in ##n##, none with degree greater than 2, so it's just solving a quadratic.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: SammyS
  • #14
andrewkirk said:
I'm not sure that's quite right.
It's what I get. To get that, youngstudent has already done most of what you describe. Reducing it to a quadratic is all that's left.
 
  • #15
haruspex said:
You've done the hard work. Just cube both sides, multiply out and simplify.
Ah perfect thank you I got 254 as the correct solution that was a lot of computation
 
  • #16
haruspex said:
It's what I get. To get that, youngstudent has already done most of what you describe. Reducing it to a quadratic is all that's left.
It's the first of the two formulas that I think is not right. The second is the same as mine, minus some cancelling (##\frac{(n+1)^2}{4n}<4^3##) but is not equivalent to the first. It's possible that the difference between the two is just an error in latex coding.
The purpose of my post was to indicate that one can do this problem deductively rather than just inductively.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K