Prove that $sec^2{theta}=(4xy)/(x+y)^2$ only when $x=y$
Show that the equation below is only possible when $x=y$
$$ sec^2{theta}=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}$$
The only way I can think of doing this is by rewriting it as
$$ cos^2{theta}=frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy} $$
then using some inequalities to prove it by using:
$$ 0leq cos^2{theta}leq 1 ;; text{ therefore } ;; 0leq frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy}leq 1 $$
But I have an aversion to using case-based solutions (checking for $x>0$, $y>0$ etc.) since I feel there must be a neater solution to these kind of problems. So my question is: Is it possible to solve this and these sort of questions using techniques that don't involve checking numerous cases?
algebra-precalculus trigonometry
add a comment |
Show that the equation below is only possible when $x=y$
$$ sec^2{theta}=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}$$
The only way I can think of doing this is by rewriting it as
$$ cos^2{theta}=frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy} $$
then using some inequalities to prove it by using:
$$ 0leq cos^2{theta}leq 1 ;; text{ therefore } ;; 0leq frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy}leq 1 $$
But I have an aversion to using case-based solutions (checking for $x>0$, $y>0$ etc.) since I feel there must be a neater solution to these kind of problems. So my question is: Is it possible to solve this and these sort of questions using techniques that don't involve checking numerous cases?
algebra-precalculus trigonometry
add a comment |
Show that the equation below is only possible when $x=y$
$$ sec^2{theta}=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}$$
The only way I can think of doing this is by rewriting it as
$$ cos^2{theta}=frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy} $$
then using some inequalities to prove it by using:
$$ 0leq cos^2{theta}leq 1 ;; text{ therefore } ;; 0leq frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy}leq 1 $$
But I have an aversion to using case-based solutions (checking for $x>0$, $y>0$ etc.) since I feel there must be a neater solution to these kind of problems. So my question is: Is it possible to solve this and these sort of questions using techniques that don't involve checking numerous cases?
algebra-precalculus trigonometry
Show that the equation below is only possible when $x=y$
$$ sec^2{theta}=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}$$
The only way I can think of doing this is by rewriting it as
$$ cos^2{theta}=frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy} $$
then using some inequalities to prove it by using:
$$ 0leq cos^2{theta}leq 1 ;; text{ therefore } ;; 0leq frac{(x+y)^2}{4xy}leq 1 $$
But I have an aversion to using case-based solutions (checking for $x>0$, $y>0$ etc.) since I feel there must be a neater solution to these kind of problems. So my question is: Is it possible to solve this and these sort of questions using techniques that don't involve checking numerous cases?
algebra-precalculus trigonometry
algebra-precalculus trigonometry
asked Apr 9 '14 at 21:38
JayJay
1,283818
1,283818
add a comment |
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
We have $sec^2 thetage 1$ for all $theta$ at which $sectheta$ is defined. So it is enough to show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, with equality only when $x=y$.
To show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, we show equivalently that $(x+y)^2ge 4xy$, or equivalently that $x^2-2xy+y^2ge 0$. But this is clear, since $x^2-2xy+y^2=(x-y)^2$. And we have equality precisely when $x=y$.
Remark: This is not very different from how you proposed to do things. There are no cases involved. And aversion to cases can be problematic. A consideration of cases (though not in this case) is often a natural approach.
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
add a comment |
$$sec^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}impliestan^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}-1=-frac{(x+y)^2-4xy}{(x+y)^2}=-left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2$$
$$ifftan^2theta+left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2=0 (1)$$
For real $displaystyle theta,tan^2thetage0$
and for real $displaystyle x,y; left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2ge0$
So, each has to be individually zero to satisfy $(1)$
add a comment |
$newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle, #1 ,rightrangle}
newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace, #1 ,rightrbrace}
newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack, #1 ,rightrbrack}
newcommand{ceil}[1]{,leftlceil, #1 ,rightrceil,}
newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
newcommand{down}{downarrow}
newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
newcommand{fermi}{,{rm f}}
newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
newcommand{iff}{Longleftrightarrow}
newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
newcommand{ol}[1]{overline{#1}}
newcommand{pars}[1]{left(, #1 ,right)}
newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{vphantom{large A},#2,},}
newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert, #1 ,rightvert}
newcommand{wt}[1]{widetilde{#1}}$
$$
mbox{Let's}quad r equiv {x over x + y}quadmbox{such that}quad
{4xy over pars{x + y}^{2}} = 4rpars{1 - r} =1 - pars{2r - 1}^{2} leq 1
$$
Since $ds{sec^{2}pars{theta} geq 1}$ the only solution occurs when $ds{r = half}$ which leads to $color{#00f}{large x = y}$.
add a comment |
$4xy$ can be rearranged as $(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2$, and therefore $sec^2theta=frac{(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2}{(x+y)^2}=1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$, which is always less than or equal to $1$ because $left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$ is greater than or equal to $0$.
Recall that $-1le costhetale1Rightarrow cos^2thetale1Rightarrow sec^2thetage1$.
We have therefore established that $sec^2thetale1$ and also that $sec^2thetage1$; both of these conditions can be satisfied only if $sec^2theta=1$.
$Rightarrow 1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=1Rightarrow left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=0$
Now if $x$ and $y$ are not equal to $0$, then the denominator $x+yne 0 Rightarrow x=y$ and neither of which is equal to $0 blacksquare$
add a comment |
from jay
we can show that
$$(x+y)^2 le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2+2xy le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2-2xy le 0$$
$$(x-y)^2 le 0$$
$$x-y le 0$$
$$x=y$$
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f747344%2fprove-that-sec2-theta-4xy-xy2-only-when-x-y%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
We have $sec^2 thetage 1$ for all $theta$ at which $sectheta$ is defined. So it is enough to show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, with equality only when $x=y$.
To show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, we show equivalently that $(x+y)^2ge 4xy$, or equivalently that $x^2-2xy+y^2ge 0$. But this is clear, since $x^2-2xy+y^2=(x-y)^2$. And we have equality precisely when $x=y$.
Remark: This is not very different from how you proposed to do things. There are no cases involved. And aversion to cases can be problematic. A consideration of cases (though not in this case) is often a natural approach.
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
add a comment |
We have $sec^2 thetage 1$ for all $theta$ at which $sectheta$ is defined. So it is enough to show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, with equality only when $x=y$.
To show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, we show equivalently that $(x+y)^2ge 4xy$, or equivalently that $x^2-2xy+y^2ge 0$. But this is clear, since $x^2-2xy+y^2=(x-y)^2$. And we have equality precisely when $x=y$.
Remark: This is not very different from how you proposed to do things. There are no cases involved. And aversion to cases can be problematic. A consideration of cases (though not in this case) is often a natural approach.
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
add a comment |
We have $sec^2 thetage 1$ for all $theta$ at which $sectheta$ is defined. So it is enough to show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, with equality only when $x=y$.
To show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, we show equivalently that $(x+y)^2ge 4xy$, or equivalently that $x^2-2xy+y^2ge 0$. But this is clear, since $x^2-2xy+y^2=(x-y)^2$. And we have equality precisely when $x=y$.
Remark: This is not very different from how you proposed to do things. There are no cases involved. And aversion to cases can be problematic. A consideration of cases (though not in this case) is often a natural approach.
We have $sec^2 thetage 1$ for all $theta$ at which $sectheta$ is defined. So it is enough to show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, with equality only when $x=y$.
To show that $frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}le 1$, we show equivalently that $(x+y)^2ge 4xy$, or equivalently that $x^2-2xy+y^2ge 0$. But this is clear, since $x^2-2xy+y^2=(x-y)^2$. And we have equality precisely when $x=y$.
Remark: This is not very different from how you proposed to do things. There are no cases involved. And aversion to cases can be problematic. A consideration of cases (though not in this case) is often a natural approach.
edited Apr 9 '14 at 21:51
answered Apr 9 '14 at 21:43
André NicolasAndré Nicolas
452k36422807
452k36422807
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
add a comment |
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
This is a much neater inequality, I'm not sure why I didn't just stick with $sec^2{theta}$ as it would have saved me from doing the dreaded cases. I don't like doing it with cases just because it feels (to me anyway) like there must exist a more condensed statement that would convey the same thing just in a more succinct way (like in this case), though of course such a form may not always exist but I aspire to try and find them! Thanks
– Jay
Apr 9 '14 at 21:55
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
You are welcome. My feeling is that first one should produce a correct proof. Through the process of producing that proof, one may discover a more succinct argument. Historically, even for (in retrospect) fairly elementary theorems, condensed conceptual proofs have sometimes followed first proofs only after many years.
– André Nicolas
Apr 9 '14 at 22:01
add a comment |
$$sec^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}impliestan^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}-1=-frac{(x+y)^2-4xy}{(x+y)^2}=-left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2$$
$$ifftan^2theta+left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2=0 (1)$$
For real $displaystyle theta,tan^2thetage0$
and for real $displaystyle x,y; left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2ge0$
So, each has to be individually zero to satisfy $(1)$
add a comment |
$$sec^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}impliestan^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}-1=-frac{(x+y)^2-4xy}{(x+y)^2}=-left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2$$
$$ifftan^2theta+left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2=0 (1)$$
For real $displaystyle theta,tan^2thetage0$
and for real $displaystyle x,y; left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2ge0$
So, each has to be individually zero to satisfy $(1)$
add a comment |
$$sec^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}impliestan^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}-1=-frac{(x+y)^2-4xy}{(x+y)^2}=-left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2$$
$$ifftan^2theta+left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2=0 (1)$$
For real $displaystyle theta,tan^2thetage0$
and for real $displaystyle x,y; left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2ge0$
So, each has to be individually zero to satisfy $(1)$
$$sec^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}impliestan^2theta=frac{4xy}{(x+y)^2}-1=-frac{(x+y)^2-4xy}{(x+y)^2}=-left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2$$
$$ifftan^2theta+left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2=0 (1)$$
For real $displaystyle theta,tan^2thetage0$
and for real $displaystyle x,y; left(frac{x-y}{x+y}right)^2ge0$
So, each has to be individually zero to satisfy $(1)$
answered Apr 10 '14 at 3:58
lab bhattacharjeelab bhattacharjee
224k15156274
224k15156274
add a comment |
add a comment |
$newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle, #1 ,rightrangle}
newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace, #1 ,rightrbrace}
newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack, #1 ,rightrbrack}
newcommand{ceil}[1]{,leftlceil, #1 ,rightrceil,}
newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
newcommand{down}{downarrow}
newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
newcommand{fermi}{,{rm f}}
newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
newcommand{iff}{Longleftrightarrow}
newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
newcommand{ol}[1]{overline{#1}}
newcommand{pars}[1]{left(, #1 ,right)}
newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{vphantom{large A},#2,},}
newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert, #1 ,rightvert}
newcommand{wt}[1]{widetilde{#1}}$
$$
mbox{Let's}quad r equiv {x over x + y}quadmbox{such that}quad
{4xy over pars{x + y}^{2}} = 4rpars{1 - r} =1 - pars{2r - 1}^{2} leq 1
$$
Since $ds{sec^{2}pars{theta} geq 1}$ the only solution occurs when $ds{r = half}$ which leads to $color{#00f}{large x = y}$.
add a comment |
$newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle, #1 ,rightrangle}
newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace, #1 ,rightrbrace}
newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack, #1 ,rightrbrack}
newcommand{ceil}[1]{,leftlceil, #1 ,rightrceil,}
newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
newcommand{down}{downarrow}
newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
newcommand{fermi}{,{rm f}}
newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
newcommand{iff}{Longleftrightarrow}
newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
newcommand{ol}[1]{overline{#1}}
newcommand{pars}[1]{left(, #1 ,right)}
newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{vphantom{large A},#2,},}
newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert, #1 ,rightvert}
newcommand{wt}[1]{widetilde{#1}}$
$$
mbox{Let's}quad r equiv {x over x + y}quadmbox{such that}quad
{4xy over pars{x + y}^{2}} = 4rpars{1 - r} =1 - pars{2r - 1}^{2} leq 1
$$
Since $ds{sec^{2}pars{theta} geq 1}$ the only solution occurs when $ds{r = half}$ which leads to $color{#00f}{large x = y}$.
add a comment |
$newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle, #1 ,rightrangle}
newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace, #1 ,rightrbrace}
newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack, #1 ,rightrbrack}
newcommand{ceil}[1]{,leftlceil, #1 ,rightrceil,}
newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
newcommand{down}{downarrow}
newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
newcommand{fermi}{,{rm f}}
newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
newcommand{iff}{Longleftrightarrow}
newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
newcommand{ol}[1]{overline{#1}}
newcommand{pars}[1]{left(, #1 ,right)}
newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{vphantom{large A},#2,},}
newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert, #1 ,rightvert}
newcommand{wt}[1]{widetilde{#1}}$
$$
mbox{Let's}quad r equiv {x over x + y}quadmbox{such that}quad
{4xy over pars{x + y}^{2}} = 4rpars{1 - r} =1 - pars{2r - 1}^{2} leq 1
$$
Since $ds{sec^{2}pars{theta} geq 1}$ the only solution occurs when $ds{r = half}$ which leads to $color{#00f}{large x = y}$.
$newcommand{+}{^{dagger}}
newcommand{angles}[1]{leftlangle, #1 ,rightrangle}
newcommand{braces}[1]{leftlbrace, #1 ,rightrbrace}
newcommand{bracks}[1]{leftlbrack, #1 ,rightrbrack}
newcommand{ceil}[1]{,leftlceil, #1 ,rightrceil,}
newcommand{dd}{{rm d}}
newcommand{down}{downarrow}
newcommand{ds}[1]{displaystyle{#1}}
newcommand{expo}[1]{,{rm e}^{#1},}
newcommand{fermi}{,{rm f}}
newcommand{floor}[1]{,leftlfloor #1 rightrfloor,}
newcommand{half}{{1 over 2}}
newcommand{ic}{{rm i}}
newcommand{iff}{Longleftrightarrow}
newcommand{imp}{Longrightarrow}
newcommand{isdiv}{,left.rightvert,}
newcommand{ket}[1]{leftvert #1rightrangle}
newcommand{ol}[1]{overline{#1}}
newcommand{pars}[1]{left(, #1 ,right)}
newcommand{partiald}[3]{frac{partial^{#1} #2}{partial #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{pp}{{cal P}}
newcommand{root}[2]{,sqrt[#1]{vphantom{large A},#2,},}
newcommand{sech}{,{rm sech}}
newcommand{sgn}{,{rm sgn}}
newcommand{totald}[3]{frac{{rm d}^{#1} #2}{{rm d} #3^{#1}}}
newcommand{ul}[1]{underline{#1}}
newcommand{verts}[1]{leftvert, #1 ,rightvert}
newcommand{wt}[1]{widetilde{#1}}$
$$
mbox{Let's}quad r equiv {x over x + y}quadmbox{such that}quad
{4xy over pars{x + y}^{2}} = 4rpars{1 - r} =1 - pars{2r - 1}^{2} leq 1
$$
Since $ds{sec^{2}pars{theta} geq 1}$ the only solution occurs when $ds{r = half}$ which leads to $color{#00f}{large x = y}$.
answered Apr 10 '14 at 4:10
Felix MarinFelix Marin
67.2k7107141
67.2k7107141
add a comment |
add a comment |
$4xy$ can be rearranged as $(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2$, and therefore $sec^2theta=frac{(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2}{(x+y)^2}=1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$, which is always less than or equal to $1$ because $left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$ is greater than or equal to $0$.
Recall that $-1le costhetale1Rightarrow cos^2thetale1Rightarrow sec^2thetage1$.
We have therefore established that $sec^2thetale1$ and also that $sec^2thetage1$; both of these conditions can be satisfied only if $sec^2theta=1$.
$Rightarrow 1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=1Rightarrow left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=0$
Now if $x$ and $y$ are not equal to $0$, then the denominator $x+yne 0 Rightarrow x=y$ and neither of which is equal to $0 blacksquare$
add a comment |
$4xy$ can be rearranged as $(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2$, and therefore $sec^2theta=frac{(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2}{(x+y)^2}=1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$, which is always less than or equal to $1$ because $left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$ is greater than or equal to $0$.
Recall that $-1le costhetale1Rightarrow cos^2thetale1Rightarrow sec^2thetage1$.
We have therefore established that $sec^2thetale1$ and also that $sec^2thetage1$; both of these conditions can be satisfied only if $sec^2theta=1$.
$Rightarrow 1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=1Rightarrow left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=0$
Now if $x$ and $y$ are not equal to $0$, then the denominator $x+yne 0 Rightarrow x=y$ and neither of which is equal to $0 blacksquare$
add a comment |
$4xy$ can be rearranged as $(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2$, and therefore $sec^2theta=frac{(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2}{(x+y)^2}=1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$, which is always less than or equal to $1$ because $left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$ is greater than or equal to $0$.
Recall that $-1le costhetale1Rightarrow cos^2thetale1Rightarrow sec^2thetage1$.
We have therefore established that $sec^2thetale1$ and also that $sec^2thetage1$; both of these conditions can be satisfied only if $sec^2theta=1$.
$Rightarrow 1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=1Rightarrow left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=0$
Now if $x$ and $y$ are not equal to $0$, then the denominator $x+yne 0 Rightarrow x=y$ and neither of which is equal to $0 blacksquare$
$4xy$ can be rearranged as $(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2$, and therefore $sec^2theta=frac{(x+y)^2-(x-y)^2}{(x+y)^2}=1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$, which is always less than or equal to $1$ because $left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2$ is greater than or equal to $0$.
Recall that $-1le costhetale1Rightarrow cos^2thetale1Rightarrow sec^2thetage1$.
We have therefore established that $sec^2thetale1$ and also that $sec^2thetage1$; both of these conditions can be satisfied only if $sec^2theta=1$.
$Rightarrow 1-left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=1Rightarrow left ( frac{x-y}{x+y} right )^2=0$
Now if $x$ and $y$ are not equal to $0$, then the denominator $x+yne 0 Rightarrow x=y$ and neither of which is equal to $0 blacksquare$
answered Nov 23 '18 at 12:46
Hussain-AlqatariHussain-Alqatari
2997
2997
add a comment |
add a comment |
from jay
we can show that
$$(x+y)^2 le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2+2xy le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2-2xy le 0$$
$$(x-y)^2 le 0$$
$$x-y le 0$$
$$x=y$$
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
add a comment |
from jay
we can show that
$$(x+y)^2 le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2+2xy le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2-2xy le 0$$
$$(x-y)^2 le 0$$
$$x-y le 0$$
$$x=y$$
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
add a comment |
from jay
we can show that
$$(x+y)^2 le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2+2xy le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2-2xy le 0$$
$$(x-y)^2 le 0$$
$$x-y le 0$$
$$x=y$$
from jay
we can show that
$$(x+y)^2 le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2+2xy le 4xy$$
$$x^2+y^2-2xy le 0$$
$$(x-y)^2 le 0$$
$$x-y le 0$$
$$x=y$$
edited May 25 '17 at 5:55
dantopa
6,44932142
6,44932142
answered May 25 '17 at 4:06
user449447user449447
1
1
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
add a comment |
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
Welcome to Math SE! Please take a look at MathJax for information about formatting your answer to make it easier to read.
– DMcMor
May 25 '17 at 4:20
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f747344%2fprove-that-sec2-theta-4xy-xy2-only-when-x-y%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown