MHB Prove $\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}+\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d}\le 10$ w/ $a,b,c,d>0$

  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving the inequality $\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}+\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d}\le 10$ under the conditions that $a, b, c, d > 0$, $a \le 1$, $a + b \le 5$, $a + b + c \le 14$, and $a + b + c + d \le 30$. Participants explore various mathematical approaches and inequalities, such as the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, to validate the claim. The constraints on the variables are critical in deriving the upper limit of the sum of square roots. The proof ultimately hinges on the relationships between the variables and their upper bounds. The conclusion affirms that the inequality holds true given the specified conditions.
anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Prove that if $a,\,b,\,c,\,d>0$ and $a\le 1,\,a+b\le 5,\,a+b+c\le 14,\,a+b+c+d\le 30$, then $\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}+\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d}\le 10$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Did I miss something, or is this problem really quite easy to solve? Thankyou for any comment!

Given the conditions:

$a \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;a+b \leq 5\;\; \wedge \;\;a+b+c\leq 14\;\; \wedge \;\; a+b+c+d \leq 30$

which by successive subtractions implies:

$a \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;b \leq 4\;\; \wedge \;\;c\leq 9\;\; \wedge \;\; d \leq 16$

or:

$\sqrt{a} \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;\sqrt{b} \leq 2\;\; \wedge \;\;\sqrt{c}\leq 3\;\; \wedge \;\; \sqrt{d} \leq 4$

Adding the four inequalities yields:

$\sqrt{a} +\sqrt{b} +\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d} \leq 1+2+3+4 = 10.$
 
lfdahl said:
Did I miss something, or is this problem really quite easy to solve? Thankyou for any comment!

Given the conditions:

$a \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;a+b \leq 5\;\; \wedge \;\;a+b+c\leq 14\;\; \wedge \;\; a+b+c+d \leq 30$

which by successive subtractions implies:

$a \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;b \leq 4\;\; \wedge \;\;c\leq 9\;\; \wedge \;\; d \leq 16$

or:

$\sqrt{a} \leq 1 \;\;\wedge \;\;\sqrt{b} \leq 2\;\; \wedge \;\;\sqrt{c}\leq 3\;\; \wedge \;\; \sqrt{d} \leq 4$

Adding the four inequalities yields:

$\sqrt{a} +\sqrt{b} +\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d} \leq 1+2+3+4 = 10.$
a = .2 b = 4.6 does not satisfy your consideration.
 
Thankyou for your comment. You´re right of course. I did miss something ... :(
 
anemone said:
Prove that if $a,\,b,\,c,\,d>0$ and $a\le 1,\,a+b\le 5,\,a+b+c\le 14,\,a+b+c+d\le 30$, then $\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}+\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d}\le 10$.

Given the constraints on the 4 partitions of the value 30 it is true that the maximum value of the sum of the square roots of these partitions is 10. The problem is proving it.

It can be shown that the sum of the square roots of 2 partitions of a value is greater than or equal to the square root of the unpartitioned value and that the value of the sum of the square roots of the 2 partitions is maximized when the partitions are equal. The equation is:
$\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b} = \sqrt{a+b+2\sqrt{ab}}$
let the value being partitioned = 1 then a+b=1 and b=a-1 and the equation becomes:
$\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b} = \sqrt{1 + 2\sqrt{a(1-a)}}$
and it can be seen that as $a$ ranges from 0 to 1, the maximum value of the sum of the square roots of the two partitions is at $a$ = 1/2. We should be able to use induction to show that whatever the values of the 2 partitions, any additional partitions of the original two partitions can only increase the value of the sum of the square roots of all the partitions. Applying this to the constraining inequalities given for the four partitions we find that
a=1, b=4, c=9 and d=16 give the maximal value for the sum of the square roots of these four partitions within the given constraints and that this sum is 10 which demonstrates the assertion.
 
Last edited:
The function $f: (0,\,+\infty)\rightarrow (0,\,+\infty)$ defined by $f(x)=\sqrt{x}$ is concave, and therefore for any positive real numbers $k_1,\,k_2,\,\cdots, \,k_n$ such that $k_1+k_2+\cdots+k_n=1$, we have

$k_1f(x_1)+k_2f(x_2)+\cdots+k_nf(x_n)\le f(k_1x_1+k_2x_2+\cdots+k_nx_n)$

Now, take $n=4$ and $k_1=\dfrac{1}{10},\,k_2=\dfrac{2}{10},\,k_3=\dfrac{3}{10},\,k_4=\dfrac{4}{10}$. It follows that

$\dfrac{1}{10}\sqrt{a}+\dfrac{2}{10}\sqrt{\dfrac{b}{4}}+\dfrac{3}{10}\sqrt{\dfrac{c}{9}}+\dfrac{4}{10}\sqrt{\dfrac{d}{16}}\le \sqrt{\dfrac{a}{10}+\dfrac{b}{20}+\dfrac{c}{30}+\dfrac{d}{40}}$

or

$\sqrt{a}+\sqrt{b}+\sqrt{c}+\sqrt{d}\le 10\sqrt{\dfrac{12a+6b+4c+3d}{120}}$

But

$12a+6b+4c+3d=3(a+b+c+d)+(a+b+c)+2(a+b)+6a\le 3(30)+14+2(5)+6(1)=120$

and the claim is then proved.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
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...

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top