What guarantees the 'greater than' sign between r/(r+b)>(r-1)/(r-1+b)?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter GreenLeaf
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Sign
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the inequality \(\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1}\) for all \(b > 0\) and its implications in a probability problem involving red and black socks. Participants explore the reasoning behind this inequality, its validity under certain conditions, and its application in solving a specific problem related to probabilities.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about the inequality and seeks a clearer understanding of its validity.
  • Another participant challenges the inequality by providing specific values for \(r\) and \(b\) that may not satisfy it.
  • Some participants suggest manipulating the inequality by multiplying both sides by \(\frac{r+b}{r}\) to explore its implications.
  • A participant describes the context of the inequality as part of a probability problem involving drawing socks, detailing the setup and the derived inequalities.
  • There is a discussion on the reasoning behind squaring the components of the inequality and how it leads to establishing bounds on \(r\) and \(b\).
  • Participants discuss the algebraic steps taken to derive inequalities involving \(r\) and \(b\), including how to combine inequalities to establish upper and lower bounds.
  • Some participants note that the inequality may not hold for all values of \(r\), particularly when \(r < 1\), while others assert that it holds for \(r \ge 1\).

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the validity of the inequality for all values of \(r\). Some participants agree that it holds under certain conditions (e.g., \(r \ge 1\)), while others present counterexamples suggesting it may not be universally true.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight that the inequality's validity may depend on specific values of \(r\) and \(b\), and the discussion includes algebraic manipulations that are not universally applicable without additional constraints.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for those interested in probability theory, mathematical inequalities, and problem-solving strategies in combinatorial contexts.

GreenLeaf
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hi all,
I've been trying to figure out why this statement is true:

[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1} \quad \text{for all } b>0[/tex]

I can't seem to reason it out. I've plugged in a few values greater than 0 and yes, it works out. But I don't understand how I can look at this and find it true.

I'm looking at it as such:
frac{r}{r} where we minus b from the denominator.
frac{r-1}{r-1} where we minus b from the denominator as well.

The only difference is that perhaps frac{r-1}{r-1} is a smaller 1 than frac{r}{r}?

If anyone could perhaps show me a more reasonable way of looking at this, I would greatly appreciate it! :)

Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not necessarily true. Try r=1/4, b=1/4.
 
Have you tried multiplying both sides by ##\frac{r+b}{r}##?
 
What happens when r = 1/2 and b = 1/3?
 
Hm. I see your point. The thing is - this is part of a solution to a probability problem. Here's the problem:

A drawer contains red socks and black socks. When two socks are drawn at random, the probability that both are red is 1/2. (a) How small can the number of socks in the drawer be? (b) How small if the number of black socks is even?

I got as far to this part:

Let r be the number of red socks.
Let b be the number of black socks.

So,

[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} * \frac{r-1}{r-1+b} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And looking at the solutions, they continued with this:

Notice that,

[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1} , for b > 0[/tex]

Therefore we can create the inequalities:

[tex](\frac{r}{r+b})^2 > \frac{1}{2} > (\frac{r-1}{r+b-1})^2[/tex]
[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1}[/tex]

From the first inequality we get

[tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2}} * (r+b)[/tex]

or

[tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2} - 1}*b = (sqrt{2} + 1)* b[/tex]

From the second we get

[tex](sqrt{2}+1)*b > r - 1[/tex]

or all told

[tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex]

For b =1, r must be greater than 2.414 and less than 3.414, and so the candidate is r = 3. for r = 3, b=1, we get

[tex]P(2 red socks) = \frac{3}{4} * \frac{2}{3} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And so the smallest number of socks is 4.

Questions I have about the above solution:
1. Why by taking the square of the two components that I could have 1/2 being between the two components? I don't understand how they got there at all. And why did they take the square of the components in the first place? What are they trying to get to?

2. How did they get this: [tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2} - 1}*b = (sqrt{2} + 1)* b[/tex] from [tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2}} * (r+b)[/tex]?

3. I get how they got [tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r[/tex] from [tex](sqrt{2}+1)*b > r - 1[/tex], but I don't understand why they had to add the third component [tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex] with [tex]r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex]Thanks in advance! :D
 
So, have you tried multiplying both sides by ##\frac{r+b}{r}##?
 
@DrClaude - Yea I tried multiplying both sides by [tex]\frac{r+b}{r}[/tex], and got 0 > -b, which is false. So are you saying that the solution in the book is actually incorrect?
 
GreenLeaf said:
@DrClaude - Yea I tried multiplying both sides by [tex]\frac{r+b}{r}[/tex], and got 0 > -b, which is false. So are you saying that the solution in the book is actually incorrect?
How did you get that? On the LHS, for instance:
$$
\frac{r}{r+b} \frac{r+b}{r} = 1
$$
 
@DrClaude - Yes I got 1 for the LHS, but the RHS became quite complicated. For the RHS, I got

[tex]\frac{r^2+br-r-b}{r^2+br-r}[/tex]

So what do you do with that?
 
  • #10
GreenLeaf said:
@DrClaude - Yes I got 1 for the LHS, but the RHS became quite complicated. For the RHS, I got

[tex]\frac{r^2+br-r-b}{r^2+br-r}[/tex]

So what do you do with that?
You have
$$
1 > \frac{r^2+br-r-b}{r^2+br-r}
$$
which should be obvious why it is true for ##r \ge 1## and ##b>0##.
 
  • #11
@DrClaude - I don't see how you got to the conclusion. How did you get there?
 
  • #12
Set ##x \equiv r^2 +br - r##. For ##r \ge 1## and ##b>0##, you have ##x > 0##. Consider
$$
1 > \frac{x - b}{x} = 1 - \frac{b}{x}
$$
for ##b>0## and ##x>0##.
 
  • #13
@DrClaude - Ok, that makes sense. So you're saying that, in the solution the statement with b > 0 is only true when r >= 1 is guaranteed?

Also - would you happen to know the answer to the 3 questions I posted as quoted below:

GreenLeaf said:
Hm. I see your point. The thing is - this is part of a solution to a probability problem. Here's the problem:

A drawer contains red socks and black socks. When two socks are drawn at random, the probability that both are red is 1/2. (a) How small can the number of socks in the drawer be? (b) How small if the number of black socks is even?

I got as far to this part:

Let r be the number of red socks.
Let b be the number of black socks.

So,

[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} * \frac{r-1}{r-1+b} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And looking at the solutions, they continued with this:

Notice that,

[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1} , for b > 0[/tex]

Therefore we can create the inequalities:

[tex](\frac{r}{r+b})^2 > \frac{1}{2} > (\frac{r-1}{r+b-1})^2[/tex]
[tex]\frac{r}{r+b} > \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} > \frac{r-1}{r+b-1}[/tex]

From the first inequality we get

[tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2}} * (r+b)[/tex]

or

[tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2} - 1}*b = (sqrt{2} + 1)* b[/tex]

From the second we get

[tex](sqrt{2}+1)*b > r - 1[/tex]

or all told

[tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex]

For b =1, r must be greater than 2.414 and less than 3.414, and so the candidate is r = 3. for r = 3, b=1, we get

[tex]P(2 red socks) = \frac{3}{4} * \frac{2}{3} = \frac{1}{2}[/tex]

And so the smallest number of socks is 4.

Questions I have about the above solution:
1. Why by taking the square of the two components that I could have 1/2 being between the two components? I don't understand how they got there at all. And why did they take the square of the components in the first place? What are they trying to get to?

2. How did they get this: [tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2} - 1}*b = (sqrt{2} + 1)* b[/tex] from [tex]r > \frac{1}{sqrt{2}} * (r+b)[/tex]?

3. I get how they got [tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r[/tex] from [tex](sqrt{2}+1)*b > r - 1[/tex], but I don't understand why they had to add the third component [tex](sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex] with [tex]r > (sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex]


Thanks in advance! :D
 
  • #14
GreenLeaf said:
1. Why by taking the square of the two components that I could have 1/2 being between the two components? I don't understand how they got there at all. And why did they take the square of the components in the first place? What are they trying to get to?
You have
$$
x \times y = \frac{1}{2}
$$
Knowing that ##x > y##, you can replace ##y## by ##x## and write
$$
x^2 > \frac{1}{2}
$$
or replace ##x## by ##y## and get
$$
y^2 < \frac{1}{2}
$$
You then combine both inequalities into one.

GreenLeaf said:
2. How did they get this: [tex]r > \frac{1}{\sqrt{2} - 1}*b = (\sqrt{2} + 1)* b[/tex] from [tex]r > \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} * (r+b)[/tex]?
This is just basic algebra. Start by collecting all the terms in ##r## on the LHS.

GreenLeaf said:
3. I get how they got [tex](\sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r[/tex] from [tex](\sqrt{2}+1)*b > r - 1[/tex], but I don't understand why they had to add the third component [tex](\sqrt{2} + 1)*b + 1 > r > (\sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex] with [tex]r > (\sqrt{2} + 1)*b[/tex]
You have two inequalities concerning ##r## which you can combine to put both an upper and a lower bound on its value.
 
  • #15
GreenLeaf said:
@DrClaude - Ok, that makes sense. So you're saying that, in the solution the statement with b > 0 is only true when r >= 1 is guaranteed?
As others have shown, the inequality doesn't hold at least for some values where ##r < 1##. I haven't spent the time to check what is the minimum value of ##r## for which it holds, but ##r \ge 1## is guaranteed to work. As you are dealing with a number of socks, i.e., ##r \in \mathbb{N} ##, this is good enough!
 
  • #16
@DrClaude - Thank you for such an elaborate explanation and to have done it so promptly as well! This forum is amazing!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K