Prove:if 1/a+1/b+1/c=1 and a,b,c >0 then (a-1)(b-1)(c-1)>=8

  • Thread starter Thread starter Danijel
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    proof
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves proving that if \( \frac{1}{a} + \frac{1}{b} + \frac{1}{c} = 1 \) and \( a, b, c > 0 \), then \( (a-1)(b-1)(c-1) \geq 8 \). The original poster expresses difficulty in approaching the proof and explores relationships between the variables.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to manipulate the inequality and the given condition to derive a relationship between \( a, b, c \) and their sum. They note that all variables must be greater than 1 to satisfy the condition. Other participants suggest exploring specific cases or reformulating the problem as an optimization issue.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring various approaches, including specific cases and optimization strategies. There is no explicit consensus, but some productive directions have been suggested, such as focusing on the relationships between the variables and considering the implications of their constraints.

Contextual Notes

There is an emphasis on the condition that \( a, b, c > 1 \) to avoid contradictions in the problem setup. The original poster seeks guidance on how to proceed with their reasoning and proofs.

Danijel
Messages
43
Reaction score
1
The problem: prove that if 1/a + 1/b + 1/c=1 and a,b,c are positive numbers then (a-1)(b-1)(c-1)>=8

I've tried it myself but couldn't do it. I have tried going backwards i.e. :
(a-1)(b-1)(c-1)>=8
(fast forward) abc -(ab+bc+ac) +a+b+c -1 >=8
Now from 1/a + 1/b + 1/c = 1 we have that ab+bc+ac/abc=1 thus :
ab + bc + ac = abc , so abc -(ab+bc+ac) +a+b+c -1>=8 is really a+b+c -1>=8
that is a+b+c >=9 . So If I could somehow prove that a+b+c>9 then I could work backwards and prove the former statement.
But the only progress I've made is :all of a,b,c must be greater than 1 because if they weren't then any of the 1/a,1/b,1/c would be greater then 1 thus we would need negatives(and a,b,c are positive) to "bring back" the value to 1, nor can they equal to 1 because the same thing would happen(one of 1/a,1/b,1/c would be equal to 1 and we would need negatives)so a>1, b>1, c>1 adding these three together we get a+b+c >3 ,and I need a+b+c+>=9.
Sorry for the long post. Could anyone give me some directions?

Thanks,
Daniel
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you prove it for 2?
## \frac1a + \frac1b = 1## Prove that ##ab\geq 4##?
 
Your problem hinges on the relationship between a, b, and c.
If a = b = c, then they are all 3, right?
Let's change one of the three...let a be (3-x), either b or c would have to increase to maintain the 1/a + 1/b + 1/c = 1 balance.
How much would it change?
Let's say they absorb the difference equally...share the burden, then you have ##\frac{1}{3-x} + \frac{2}{3+y} = 1##. Can you solve for y in terms of x? If y > x/2 you have shown that (3-x) + (3+y)+(3+y) > 9.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Danijel
Thank you RUber!
 
Danijel said:
The problem: prove that if 1/a + 1/b + 1/c=1 and a,b,c are positive numbers then (a-1)(b-1)(c-1)>=8

I've tried it myself but couldn't do it. I have tried going backwards i.e. :
(a-1)(b-1)(c-1)>=8
(fast forward) abc -(ab+bc+ac) +a+b+c -1 >=8
Now from 1/a + 1/b + 1/c = 1 we have that ab+bc+ac/abc=1 thus :
ab + bc + ac = abc , so abc -(ab+bc+ac) +a+b+c -1>=8 is really a+b+c -1>=8
that is a+b+c >=9 . So If I could somehow prove that a+b+c>9 then I could work backwards and prove the former statement.
But the only progress I've made is :all of a,b,c must be greater than 1 because if they weren't then any of the 1/a,1/b,1/c would be greater then 1 thus we would need negatives(and a,b,c are positive) to "bring back" the value to 1, nor can they equal to 1 because the same thing would happen(one of 1/a,1/b,1/c would be equal to 1 and we would need negatives)so a>1, b>1, c>1 adding these three together we get a+b+c >3 ,and I need a+b+c+>=9.
Sorry for the long post. Could anyone give me some directions?

Thanks,
Daniel

You can regard this as a constrained optimization problem:
\begin{array}{l} \min_{a,b,c} f(a,b,c) = (a-1)(b-1)(c-1) \\<br /> \text{subject to} \\<br /> \displaystyle \frac{1}{a} + \frac{1}{b} + \frac{1}{c} = 1<br /> \end{array}<br />
Let us restrict the problem to ##a,b,c > 1##. There is a good reason for this, because if you allow any of ##a,b,c## to be ##< 1## but positive, then you must also allow one or more of them to be ##< 0## in order to balance out the constraint. In that case you can construct a sequence of feasible ##a_n, b_n, c_n## values that give ##f(a_n,b_n,c_n) \to -\infty##: an unbounded problem having no minimum.

OK, so we want ##a, b, c > 1##. Solve the constraint for ##c## as a function of ##a,b##, then plug that formula into ##f(a,b,c)## to get a new function ##F(a,b)## involving ##a## and ##b## alone, and with no constraint anymore (other than ##a,b > 1##, and implicitly, ##c > 1##). This unconstrained 2-variable optimization problem can be solved by finding the stationary point (or points) of ##F(a,b)##. If ##\min_{a,b} F(a,b) \geq 8## you are done.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Danijel
Ray Vickson said:
You can regard this as a constrained optimization problem:
\begin{array}{l} \min_{a,b,c} f(a,b,c) = (a-1)(b-1)(c-1) \\<br /> \text{subject to} \\<br /> \displaystyle \frac{1}{a} + \frac{1}{b} + \frac{1}{c} = 1<br /> \end{array}<br />
Let us restrict the problem to ##a,b,c > 1##. There is a good reason for this, because if you allow any of ##a,b,c## to be ##< 1## but positive, then you must also allow one or more of them to be ##< 0## in order to balance out the constraint. In that case you can construct a sequence of feasible ##a_n, b_n, c_n## values that give ##f(a_n,b_n,c_n) \to -\infty##: an unbounded problem having no minimum.

OK, so we want ##a, b, c > 1##. Solve the constraint for ##c## as a function of ##a,b##, then plug that formula into ##f(a,b,c)## to get a new function ##F(a,b)## involving ##a## and ##b## alone, and with no constraint anymore (other than ##a,b > 1##, and implicitly, ##c > 1##). This unconstrained 2-variable optimization problem can be solved by finding the stationary point (or points) of ##F(a,b)##. If ##\min_{a,b} F(a,b) \geq 8## you are done.

Wow, I would've never thought of something like that. Although this way of proving is a little too complex for me.
Thank you for your reply!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K