Is There a Solution to the Challenge of Inequality?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge Inequality
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mathematical inequality involving four variables \( k, l, m, n \) constrained between 0 and 1, specifically showing that if \( klmn = (1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n) \), then the inequality \( (k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n) \ge 1 \) holds true. Participants acknowledged a previous oversight regarding a minus sign in the proof, emphasizing the importance of clarity in mathematical expressions. The proof provided by user lfdahl was recognized as valid and distinct from other existing proofs, contributing valuable insights to the community.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic algebraic inequalities
  • Familiarity with the properties of real numbers in the interval (0, 1)
  • Knowledge of mathematical proof techniques
  • Experience with variable manipulation in inequalities
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore advanced topics in algebraic inequalities
  • Study the implications of variable constraints in mathematical proofs
  • Learn about the role of symmetry in inequalities
  • Investigate other proofs of similar inequalities involving multiple variables
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students studying algebra, and anyone interested in the field of inequalities and mathematical proofs.

anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Given that $0<k,\,l,\,m,\,n<1$ and $klmn=(1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n)$, show that $(k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n)\ge1$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I´m so sorry for my mistake: A minus-sign was overlooked, and the coupling of the four variables k, l, m, n is not obvious. Sorry!

Given:
\[klmn = (1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n),\: \: \: \: 0 < k,l,m,n < 1\]

This equality is only possible, if LHS and RHS have equal factors* (not necessarily in the same order).

\[klmn = (1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n)\\\\ =1 - (k+l+m+n)+(k+m)(l+n)+mk+nl-(klm+kln+kmn+lmn)+klmn\\\\ \Rightarrow (k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n)=1+mk(1-n-l)+nl(1-m-k)\]

Using (*): WLOG I can take $k = 1-l$, and $n = 1-m$. Thus, the variables are coupled pairwise. I could as well take $k = 1-n$ and $l = 1-m$. The outcome will be exactly the same. But taking $k = 1-m$ and $l = 1-n$ doesn´t work. I don´t know why ...
(- well, it works, because the $\ge$ is still valid).\[(k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n)=1+mk((1-l)-n)+nl(1-m-k)\\\\ =1+mk(k-(1-m))+(1-m)(1-k)(1-m-k)\\\\ =1-mk(1-m-k)+(1-m)(1-k)(1-m-k)\\\\ =1+(1-m-k)(1-m-k+mk-mk)\\\\ =1+(1-m-k)^2 \geq 1\]
 
Last edited:
lfdahl said:
I´m so sorry for my mistake: A minus-sign was overlooked, and the coupling of the four variables k, l, m, n is not obvious. Sorry!

Hey lfdahl, seriously, there's no need to apologize!(Smile) And everything is fine and perfect with your valid proof!:cool:

lfdahl said:
Given:
\[klmn = (1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n),\: \: \: \: 0 < k,l,m,n < 1\]

This equality is only possible, if LHS and RHS have equal factors* (not necessarily in the same order).

\[klmn = (1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n)\\\\ =1 - (k+l+m+n)+(k+m)(l+n)+mk+nl-(klm+kln+kmn+lmn)+klmn\\\\ \Rightarrow (k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n)=1+mk(1-n-l)+nl(1-m-k)\]

Using (*): WLOG I can take $k = 1-l$, and $n = 1-m$. Thus, the variables are coupled pairwise. I could as well take $k = 1-n$ and $l = 1-m$. The outcome will be exactly the same. But taking $k = 1-m$ and $l = 1-n$ doesn´t work. I don´t know why ...
(- well, it works, because the $\ge$ is still valid).\[(k+l+m+n)-(k+m)(l+n)=1+mk((1-l)-n)+nl(1-m-k)\\\\ =1+mk(k-(1-m))+(1-m)(1-k)(1-m-k)\\\\ =1-mk(1-m-k)+(1-m)(1-k)(1-m-k)\\\\ =1+(1-m-k)(1-m-k+mk-mk)\\\\ =1+(1-m-k)^2 \geq 1\]

Well done, lfdahl! Your proof is different from the one that I saw online somewhere, hence, I will post it here to share with the community:

We're given $klmn=(1-k)(1-l)(1-m)(1-n)$, we can rewrite it as $\dfrac{km}{(1-k)(1-m)}=\dfrac{(1-l)(1-n)}{ln}$ and this is also equivalent to $\dfrac{(k+m)-1}{(1-k)(1-m)}=\dfrac{1-(l+n)}{ln}$.

Recall that if we have $a=b$, then $ab= a^2=b^2\ge0$.

Hence, $\dfrac{(k+m)-1}{(1-k)(1-m)}\cdot\dfrac{1-(l+n)}{ln}\ge 0$.

Since $0<k,\,l,\,m,\,n<1$, we see that the product of the terms in the denominator greater than zero, this yields:

$((k+m)-1)(1-(l+n))\ge0$

$k+m-(k+m)(l+n)-1+l+n\ge0$

$k+m+l+n-(k+m)(l+n)\ge1$ (Q.E.D.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
892