MHB Ten segments. One can form a triangle.

  • Thread starter Thread starter caffeinemachine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Form Triangle
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on proving that among ten segments with integer lengths between 1cm and 55cm, three can be selected to form a triangle. It suggests that the conditions can be relaxed to include lengths greater than or equal to 1cm. The argument involves sorting the lengths and assuming the claim is false, leading to a super Fibonacci sequence where the maximum length contradicts the upper limit of 55cm. The conclusion drawn is that it's impossible to select three segments that do not form a triangle under the given conditions. The reasoning highlights the importance of the triangle inequality in this context.
caffeinemachine
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
799
Reaction score
15
Each of ten segments has integer length and each one's length is greater than 1cm and less than 55cm. Prove that you can select three sides of a triangle among the segments.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
caffeinemachine said:
Each of ten segments has integer length and each one's length is greater than 1cm and less than 55cm. Prove that you can select three sides of a triangle among the segments.

Is the wording right? It looks like you can relax the conditions to the lengths being greater than or equal 1cm and less than 55cm.

CB
 
CaptainBlack said:
Is the wording right? It looks like you can relax the conditions to the lengths being greater than or equal 1cm and less than 55cm.

CB

I think you are right. I've taken this from a book and in the book they have the conditions I have posted.
 
caffeinemachine said:
I think you are right. I've taken this from a book and in the book they have the conditions I have posted.

Sorting the lengths into non-decreasing order, and assume that the claim is false, then the ordered sequence of lengths is a super Fibonacci sequence, meaning that:

\[ l_{k} \ge l_{k-1}+l_{k-2}, k=3, .., 10 \]

Thus the set of lengths which has the smallest maximum value such that three may not be selected to form a triangle is the Fibonacci sequence, but then \(l_{10}\ge 55\), a contradiction.

(note I regard the degenerate triangle with two zero angles as a non-triangle, the argument is easily modified if you want this to count as a triangle)

CB
 
Last edited:
CaptainBlack said:
Sorting the lengths into non-decreasing order, and assume that the claim is false, then the ordered sequence of lengths is a super Fibonacci sequence, meaning that:

\[ l_{k} \ge l_{k-1}+l_{k-2}, k=3, .., 10 \]

Thus the set of lengths which has the smallest maximum value such that three may not be selected to form a triangle is the Fibonacci sequence, but then \(l_10\ge 55\), a contradiction.

(note I regard the degenerate triangle with two zero angles as a non-triangle, the argument is easily modified if you want this to count as a triangle)

CB
Nice.
 
Thread 'Video on imaginary numbers and some queries'
Hi, I was watching the following video. I found some points confusing. Could you please help me to understand the gaps? Thanks, in advance! Question 1: Around 4:22, the video says the following. So for those mathematicians, negative numbers didn't exist. You could subtract, that is find the difference between two positive quantities, but you couldn't have a negative answer or negative coefficients. Mathematicians were so averse to negative numbers that there was no single quadratic...
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...
Thread 'Unit Circle Double Angle Derivations'
Here I made a terrible mistake of assuming this to be an equilateral triangle and set 2sinx=1 => x=pi/6. Although this did derive the double angle formulas it also led into a terrible mess trying to find all the combinations of sides. I must have been tired and just assumed 6x=180 and 2sinx=1. By that time, I was so mindset that I nearly scolded a person for even saying 90-x. I wonder if this is a case of biased observation that seeks to dis credit me like Jesus of Nazareth since in reality...

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
30
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Back
Top