MHB Is $10^a\lt 127$ True for the Real Root of $x^3-3x-3=0$?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cubic Root
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Given $a$ is the real root for $x^3-3x-3=0$, prove that $10^a\lt 127$.
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
anemone said:
Given $a$ is the real root for $x^3-3x-3=0$, prove that $10^a\lt 127$.
my solution:
let $f(x)=x^3-3x-3$
$f(2.10351)<0,f(2.10381)>0$
there is a real solution "a" satisfying $2.10351<a<2.10381$
but $log 127\approx 2.10381$
$\therefore 10^a<127$
 
Last edited:
anemone said:
Given $a$ is the real root for $x^3-3x-3=0$, prove that $10^a\lt 127$.

$$a=2\cosh\left(\dfrac13\cosh^{-1}\left(\dfrac32\right)\right)=\left(\dfrac{3+\sqrt5}{2}\right)^{1/3}+\left(\dfrac{3-\sqrt5}{2}\right)^{1/3}<\log(127)$$

...but I don't have proof. :(
 
I made a silly blunder...I thought I solved this problem elegantly and so I posted this problem as a challenge...and now that the time has come for me to post my solution, I realize my solution doesn't work. (Angry):o

I have to admit this and I will continue to work on this problem and hopefully, I can crack using a different method than Albert's (thanks Albert for participating) and perhaps work on the idea provided by greg1313.
 
My solution:

It will suffice to show that:

$$a<\log(127)$$

If we define:

$$f(x)=x^3-3x-3$$

A quick sign check shows us:

$$f(2)=2^3-3(2)-3=-1$$

$$f(3)=3^3-3(3)-3=15$$

So, we know $2<a<3$...and since $10^2<127<10^3$, we also know $2<\log(127)<3$. And so, we may begin the continued fraction representation of each by stating:

$$a\approx[2;\cdots]$$

$$\log(127)\approx[2;\cdots]$$

For the purpose of continuing the computation of the continued fraction representation of $\log(127)$, we will use:

$$\log(127)=2+\log(1.27)$$

To get the next partial quotient for $a$, we will make the substitution:

$$x=\frac{1}{x_1}+2$$

and we then find:

$$f_1\left(x_1\right)=x_1^3f\left(\frac{1}{x_1}+2\right)=x_1^3\left(\left(\frac{2x_1+1}{x_1}\right)^3-3\left(\frac{2x_1+1}{x_1}\right)-3\right)=-x_1^3+9x_1^2+6x_1+1$$

We then observe:

$$f_1(9)=55$$

$$f_1(10)=-39$$

And so we have:

$$a\approx[2;9,\cdots]$$

And using the iterative method outlined >>here<<, we confirm that:

$$1.27^9<10<1.27^{10}$$

Hence:

$$\log(127)\approx[2;9,\cdots]$$

So, we find the next partial quotient for $a$:

$$f_2\left(x_2\right)=x_2^3f_1\left(\frac{9x_2+1}{x_2}\right)=x_2^3\left(-\left(\frac{9x_2+1}{x_2}\right)^3+9\left(\frac{9x_2+1}{x_2}\right)^2+6\left(\frac{9x_2+1}{x_2}\right)+1\right)=55x_2^3-75x_2^2-18x_2-1$$

We find:

$$f_2(1)=-39$$

$$f_2(2)=103$$

Thus:

$$a\approx[2;9,1,\cdots]$$

And we then confirm:

$$\left(\frac{10}{1.27^9}\right)^1<1.27<\left(\frac{10}{1.27^9}\right)^2$$

Hence:

$$\log(127)\approx[2;9,1,\cdots]$$

Continuing this process, we eventually find:

$$a\approx[2;9,1,1,1,2,1,\cdots]$$

$$\log(127)\approx[2;9,1,1,1,2,4,\cdots]$$

And so we may now conclude:

$$a<\log(127)$$
 
Awesome, MarkFL!(Yes):cool:
 
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