How is it possible to solve this system of 2 equations with 4 unknowns?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jdinatale
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    System Unknowns
Click For Summary
To solve a system of two equations with four unknowns, it's established that four independent equations are necessary for a unique solution. With fewer equations, the system may yield infinitely many solutions or none, depending on consistency. The discussion highlights that one equation is nonlinear, complicating the solution process. Several trivial solutions are proposed, but the question remains whether they represent the complete set of solutions. The conversation suggests exploring variable relationships and leveraging symmetry to find a more elegant solution.
jdinatale
Messages
153
Reaction score
0
I've always been taught that to solve for 4 unknowns, you need 4 equations. This question seems to suggest that there are in fact solutions. Here's the problem and my work so far. The most I can seem to do is eliminate one variable, I'm not sure how to shake a second one out, let alone all 4.

Joseph-1.png
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jdinatale said:
I've always been taught that to solve for 4 unknowns, you need 4 equations.
For linear equations: You need 4 equations in order for there to be a UNIQUE solution. With fewer equations than unknowns, there will be either infinitely many solutions or no solutions, depending on whether the equations are consistent or not.

However, note that your second equation is not linear in x, y, and z.

Your work so far is correct, but I don't think it's getting you any closer to a solution.

I suggest solving one of the equations for one of the variables in terms of the others. Then substitute into the other equation and simplify. Most likely there will be infinitely many solutions, so the goal is to try to characterize the set of solutions in the simplest way possible.
 
If you have four unknowns, you need four independent equations to find a unique solution. You won't be able to find a unique solution in this case.
 
Well, I've found a fairly trivial set of solutions, but are these the only ones?

Solutions 1: {x = w, z = -y}
Solution 2: {x = -z, y = w}
Solution 3: {y = x, z = w}

The real question is - are these solutions the only ones?
 
Actually this equation might be on the right track:

yz + xz + xy = \frac{xyz}{x + y + z}

Try solving for one of the variables in terms of the others. This will probably involve the quadratic formula. Also be careful that this equation is true only if x + y + z \neq 0.
 
jbunniii said:
Actually this equation might be on the right track:

yz + xz + xy = \frac{xyz}{x + y + z}

Try solving for one of the variables in terms of the others. This will probably involve the quadratic formula. Also be careful that this equation is true only if x + y + z \neq 0.

I think we're off track. I've confirmed using mathematica that


Untitled-6.png




which is true for all x + y + z /= 0 and y + z /= 0.

However, this is a putnam problem, so I know that this isn't the sort of solution they are looking for. There has to be a more elegant solution.
 
You probably want to take advantage of the symmetry with which x, y, and z appear in the problem.
 
vela said:
You probably want to take advantage of the symmetry with which x, y, and z appear in the problem.

Well, I feel like I've already done that with these solutions. I think the union of these three sets would give the complete set of solutions. Isn't this the best we can do with 4 variables and 2 equations?

2wcjg3p.png
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
6K