MHB Find the smallest possible value 1-1/(n_1)-1/(n_2)-1/(n_3)

  • Thread starter Thread starter lfdahl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Value
AI Thread Summary
The smallest possible value of the expression 1 - (1/n1) - (1/n2) - (1/n3) occurs when n1, n2, and n3 are distinct positive integers that satisfy the condition (1/n1) + (1/n2) + (1/n3) < 1. The minimum is achieved with n1 = 3, n2 = 4, and n3 = 5, resulting in a value of 13/60. The proof involves treating the sum of the fractions as a single quantity and minimizing the expression accordingly. Participants in the discussion noted the importance of distinct integers and provided corrections to previous answers. The final conclusion confirms that the minimum value is indeed 13/60.
lfdahl
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
747
Reaction score
0
Find, with proof, the smallest possible value of $1-\frac{1}{n_1}-\frac{1}{n_2}-\frac{1}{n_3}$

where $n_1,n_2$ and $n_3$ are different positive integers, that satisfy:$\frac{1}{n_1}+\frac{1}{n_2}+\frac{1}{n_3} < 1.$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
First, $1- \frac{1}{x_1}- \frac{1}{x_2}- \frac{1}{x_3}= 1- \left(\frac{1}{x_1}
+ \frac{1}{x_2}+ \frac{1}{x_3}\right)$ so we can treat $\frac{1}{x_1}
+ \frac{1}{x_2}+ \frac{1}{x_3}$ as a single quantity.

1- 3/x= (x- 3)/x is smallest when x= 3. Since $x_1$, $x_2$, and $x_3$ have be distinct integers, $1- \frac{1}{x_1}- \frac{1}{x_2}- \frac{1}{x_3}$ will be minimum when $x_1= 3$, $x_2= 4$, and $x_3= 5$. In that case, $1- \frac{1}{x_1}- \frac{1}{x_2}- \frac{1}{x_3}= 1- \frac{1}{3}- \frac{1}{4}- \frac{1}{5}= \frac{60}{60}- \frac{20}{60}- \frac{15}{60}- \frac{12}{60}= \frac{13}{60}$
 
Hi, Country Boy
Your answer is not correct. Also please note, that any contribution should be hidden by spoiler tags. Thankyou.
 
The problem involves maximizing $\dfrac1{n_1}+\dfrac1{n_2}+\dfrac1{n_3}$. We can thus let $n_1=2$ and $n_2=3$. Then $\dfrac12+\dfrac13+\dfrac1{n_3}<1$ $\implies$ $\dfrac1{n_3}<\dfrac16$ $\implies$ $n_3=7$. So the minimum value of $1-\left(\dfrac1{n_1}+\dfrac1{n_2}+\dfrac1{n_3}\right)$ is $1-\left(\dfrac12+\dfrac13+\dfrac17\right)=\dfrac1{42}$.
 
Olinguito said:
The problem involves maximizing $\dfrac1{n_1}+\dfrac1{n_2}+\dfrac1{n_3}$. We can thus let $n_1=2$ and $n_2=3$. Then $\dfrac12+\dfrac13+\dfrac1{n_3}<1$ $\implies$ $\dfrac1{n_3}<\dfrac16$ $\implies$ $n_3=7$. So the minimum value of $1-\left(\dfrac1{n_1}+\dfrac1{n_2}+\dfrac1{n_3}\right)$ is $1-\left(\dfrac12+\dfrac13+\dfrac17\right)=\dfrac1{42}$.
You´re right, Olinguito (Yes)

Thankyou for your participation!
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top