If $xin mathbbR$ such $|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||=x$

Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Let $xin mathbbR$, and such
$$|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||=x$$
find the maximum of the $x$
I have try $f(x)=|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||$,I have find
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$
recurrence-relations
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Let $xin mathbbR$, and such
$$|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||=x$$
find the maximum of the $x$
I have try $f(x)=|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||$,I have find
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$
recurrence-relations
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28
 |Â
show 6 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
Let $xin mathbbR$, and such
$$|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||=x$$
find the maximum of the $x$
I have try $f(x)=|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||$,I have find
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$
recurrence-relations
Let $xin mathbbR$, and such
$$|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||=x$$
find the maximum of the $x$
I have try $f(x)=|1-|2-|3-|4-cdots-|2011-x|cdots||||$,I have find
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$
recurrence-relations
edited Aug 29 at 5:27
tarit goswami
1,139219
1,139219
asked Aug 29 at 3:45
communnites
1,2201431
1,2201431
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28
 |Â
show 6 more comments
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28
 |Â
show 6 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Let us show that $x=1$ is the largest fixed point of $f(x) = |1-|2-|ldots-|2011-x|ldots|||$. First of all, it can be easily seen that it is indeed a fixed point (see the table below).
Now, let $N := 1+ldots+2011$. We definitely have $f(N) = 0$ and $f(N+z) = z$ for $zge 0$. So, $f$ cannot have a fixed point larger than $N$.
Assume that $x > 1$ is a fixed point of $f$. Then $1 < x = |1-|2-|ldots|||$. That means that the non-negative number $|2-|ldots||$ has distance larger than $1$ to $1$. That is, $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. Hence, similarly, $|3-|ldots|| > 4 = 1 + 1 + 2$. Therefore, $|4-|ldots|| > 7 = 1 + 1 + 2 + 3$ and so on. In the end, $|2011-x| > 1 + 1 +ldots + 2010$. So $x > 1+N$, which is a contradiction.
Here is why $x=1$ is a fixed point of $f$:
$$
beginmatrix
k & |k-a|\
2011 & boxed2010\
boxed2010 & 0 \
2009 & 2009\
2008 & 1\
2007 & boxed2006\
boxed2006 & 0\
vdots & vdots\
& boxed2\
boxed2 & 0\
1 & 1
endmatrix
$$
The boxed values are the ones that are even but not divisible by $4$.
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
We claim that $1$ is the highest value for which $f_2011(x)=x.$
Let $f_a(x)$ represent $|1-|2-|3-|4-...-|a-x|...||||.$
We look for a pattern to calculate $f_2011(1).$
Take note that for $c>4,$ we have $f_c(1)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-2(|(c-1)-(c-1)|)=f_c-2(0)=f_c-3(|c-3|)=f_c-3(c-3)=f_c-4((c-4)-(c-3))=f_c-4(|-1|)=f_c-4(1).$
Applying this repeatedly gives $f_2011(1)=f_2007(1)=f_2003(1)=...=f_3(1)=|3-|2-|1-1|||=|3-|2-0||=|3-2|=1.$ Therefore, $f_2011(x)=x$ is satisfied for $x=1.$
Now we will prove that that is the maximum possible value of $x$ which can work.
We will evaluate $f_2011(2).$ We let $d$ be a positive integer such that $g<4.$ We will start to evaluate $f_a(2)$. Calculating, we have $f_a(2)=f_a-1(|a-2|)=f_a-1(a-2)=f_a-2(|(a-1)-(a-2)|)=f_a-2(1).$ Applying this, we get $f_2011(2)=f_2009(1)=f_1(1)=|1-1|=0.$
We know that the slope of the absolute value is $-1$ or $1$ since there is just one variable $x,$ and the absolute value would change its coefficient, and nothing else.
Since we know that the function is continuous, we have that from $f_2011(1)$ to $f_2011(2)$ that the slope is $-1.$ We know that from there, even if it it has a slope of $1$ $f_2011(2)$ to infinity, it would still be an parallel line that never intersects. That means for every real number greater than $2,$ since $y=x$ can't intersect with $f_2011(x),$ $x=1$ is the greatest solution $boxedtextQ.E.D..$
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
Let us show that $x=1$ is the largest fixed point of $f(x) = |1-|2-|ldots-|2011-x|ldots|||$. First of all, it can be easily seen that it is indeed a fixed point (see the table below).
Now, let $N := 1+ldots+2011$. We definitely have $f(N) = 0$ and $f(N+z) = z$ for $zge 0$. So, $f$ cannot have a fixed point larger than $N$.
Assume that $x > 1$ is a fixed point of $f$. Then $1 < x = |1-|2-|ldots|||$. That means that the non-negative number $|2-|ldots||$ has distance larger than $1$ to $1$. That is, $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. Hence, similarly, $|3-|ldots|| > 4 = 1 + 1 + 2$. Therefore, $|4-|ldots|| > 7 = 1 + 1 + 2 + 3$ and so on. In the end, $|2011-x| > 1 + 1 +ldots + 2010$. So $x > 1+N$, which is a contradiction.
Here is why $x=1$ is a fixed point of $f$:
$$
beginmatrix
k & |k-a|\
2011 & boxed2010\
boxed2010 & 0 \
2009 & 2009\
2008 & 1\
2007 & boxed2006\
boxed2006 & 0\
vdots & vdots\
& boxed2\
boxed2 & 0\
1 & 1
endmatrix
$$
The boxed values are the ones that are even but not divisible by $4$.
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
Let us show that $x=1$ is the largest fixed point of $f(x) = |1-|2-|ldots-|2011-x|ldots|||$. First of all, it can be easily seen that it is indeed a fixed point (see the table below).
Now, let $N := 1+ldots+2011$. We definitely have $f(N) = 0$ and $f(N+z) = z$ for $zge 0$. So, $f$ cannot have a fixed point larger than $N$.
Assume that $x > 1$ is a fixed point of $f$. Then $1 < x = |1-|2-|ldots|||$. That means that the non-negative number $|2-|ldots||$ has distance larger than $1$ to $1$. That is, $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. Hence, similarly, $|3-|ldots|| > 4 = 1 + 1 + 2$. Therefore, $|4-|ldots|| > 7 = 1 + 1 + 2 + 3$ and so on. In the end, $|2011-x| > 1 + 1 +ldots + 2010$. So $x > 1+N$, which is a contradiction.
Here is why $x=1$ is a fixed point of $f$:
$$
beginmatrix
k & |k-a|\
2011 & boxed2010\
boxed2010 & 0 \
2009 & 2009\
2008 & 1\
2007 & boxed2006\
boxed2006 & 0\
vdots & vdots\
& boxed2\
boxed2 & 0\
1 & 1
endmatrix
$$
The boxed values are the ones that are even but not divisible by $4$.
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
Let us show that $x=1$ is the largest fixed point of $f(x) = |1-|2-|ldots-|2011-x|ldots|||$. First of all, it can be easily seen that it is indeed a fixed point (see the table below).
Now, let $N := 1+ldots+2011$. We definitely have $f(N) = 0$ and $f(N+z) = z$ for $zge 0$. So, $f$ cannot have a fixed point larger than $N$.
Assume that $x > 1$ is a fixed point of $f$. Then $1 < x = |1-|2-|ldots|||$. That means that the non-negative number $|2-|ldots||$ has distance larger than $1$ to $1$. That is, $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. Hence, similarly, $|3-|ldots|| > 4 = 1 + 1 + 2$. Therefore, $|4-|ldots|| > 7 = 1 + 1 + 2 + 3$ and so on. In the end, $|2011-x| > 1 + 1 +ldots + 2010$. So $x > 1+N$, which is a contradiction.
Here is why $x=1$ is a fixed point of $f$:
$$
beginmatrix
k & |k-a|\
2011 & boxed2010\
boxed2010 & 0 \
2009 & 2009\
2008 & 1\
2007 & boxed2006\
boxed2006 & 0\
vdots & vdots\
& boxed2\
boxed2 & 0\
1 & 1
endmatrix
$$
The boxed values are the ones that are even but not divisible by $4$.
Let us show that $x=1$ is the largest fixed point of $f(x) = |1-|2-|ldots-|2011-x|ldots|||$. First of all, it can be easily seen that it is indeed a fixed point (see the table below).
Now, let $N := 1+ldots+2011$. We definitely have $f(N) = 0$ and $f(N+z) = z$ for $zge 0$. So, $f$ cannot have a fixed point larger than $N$.
Assume that $x > 1$ is a fixed point of $f$. Then $1 < x = |1-|2-|ldots|||$. That means that the non-negative number $|2-|ldots||$ has distance larger than $1$ to $1$. That is, $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. Hence, similarly, $|3-|ldots|| > 4 = 1 + 1 + 2$. Therefore, $|4-|ldots|| > 7 = 1 + 1 + 2 + 3$ and so on. In the end, $|2011-x| > 1 + 1 +ldots + 2010$. So $x > 1+N$, which is a contradiction.
Here is why $x=1$ is a fixed point of $f$:
$$
beginmatrix
k & |k-a|\
2011 & boxed2010\
boxed2010 & 0 \
2009 & 2009\
2008 & 1\
2007 & boxed2006\
boxed2006 & 0\
vdots & vdots\
& boxed2\
boxed2 & 0\
1 & 1
endmatrix
$$
The boxed values are the ones that are even but not divisible by $4$.
edited Aug 29 at 5:36
answered Aug 29 at 4:56
amsmath
2,407114
2,407114
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
 |Â
show 1 more comment
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 13:46
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 15:52
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
$N=1+2+3...+2011$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 21:21
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
@JasonKim How do you think I can understand what you mean? Try to show a bit of empathy. That's also very important when writing proofs in mathematics. You don't write them to show others that you have understood the problem, but for making others understand. So, when you write something mathematic, think twice about whether other people can understand your stuff. What I have written above and what you stated in your last comment is the definition of a number, nothing more.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 21:41
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
I don't understand why we need to prove for just all numbers $N$ greater than $1.$ Also, I suggest writing a few more terms to make the reader understand how it went from all $1$'s to $2011.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 30 at 0:12
 |Â
show 1 more comment
up vote
0
down vote
We claim that $1$ is the highest value for which $f_2011(x)=x.$
Let $f_a(x)$ represent $|1-|2-|3-|4-...-|a-x|...||||.$
We look for a pattern to calculate $f_2011(1).$
Take note that for $c>4,$ we have $f_c(1)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-2(|(c-1)-(c-1)|)=f_c-2(0)=f_c-3(|c-3|)=f_c-3(c-3)=f_c-4((c-4)-(c-3))=f_c-4(|-1|)=f_c-4(1).$
Applying this repeatedly gives $f_2011(1)=f_2007(1)=f_2003(1)=...=f_3(1)=|3-|2-|1-1|||=|3-|2-0||=|3-2|=1.$ Therefore, $f_2011(x)=x$ is satisfied for $x=1.$
Now we will prove that that is the maximum possible value of $x$ which can work.
We will evaluate $f_2011(2).$ We let $d$ be a positive integer such that $g<4.$ We will start to evaluate $f_a(2)$. Calculating, we have $f_a(2)=f_a-1(|a-2|)=f_a-1(a-2)=f_a-2(|(a-1)-(a-2)|)=f_a-2(1).$ Applying this, we get $f_2011(2)=f_2009(1)=f_1(1)=|1-1|=0.$
We know that the slope of the absolute value is $-1$ or $1$ since there is just one variable $x,$ and the absolute value would change its coefficient, and nothing else.
Since we know that the function is continuous, we have that from $f_2011(1)$ to $f_2011(2)$ that the slope is $-1.$ We know that from there, even if it it has a slope of $1$ $f_2011(2)$ to infinity, it would still be an parallel line that never intersects. That means for every real number greater than $2,$ since $y=x$ can't intersect with $f_2011(x),$ $x=1$ is the greatest solution $boxedtextQ.E.D..$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
We claim that $1$ is the highest value for which $f_2011(x)=x.$
Let $f_a(x)$ represent $|1-|2-|3-|4-...-|a-x|...||||.$
We look for a pattern to calculate $f_2011(1).$
Take note that for $c>4,$ we have $f_c(1)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-2(|(c-1)-(c-1)|)=f_c-2(0)=f_c-3(|c-3|)=f_c-3(c-3)=f_c-4((c-4)-(c-3))=f_c-4(|-1|)=f_c-4(1).$
Applying this repeatedly gives $f_2011(1)=f_2007(1)=f_2003(1)=...=f_3(1)=|3-|2-|1-1|||=|3-|2-0||=|3-2|=1.$ Therefore, $f_2011(x)=x$ is satisfied for $x=1.$
Now we will prove that that is the maximum possible value of $x$ which can work.
We will evaluate $f_2011(2).$ We let $d$ be a positive integer such that $g<4.$ We will start to evaluate $f_a(2)$. Calculating, we have $f_a(2)=f_a-1(|a-2|)=f_a-1(a-2)=f_a-2(|(a-1)-(a-2)|)=f_a-2(1).$ Applying this, we get $f_2011(2)=f_2009(1)=f_1(1)=|1-1|=0.$
We know that the slope of the absolute value is $-1$ or $1$ since there is just one variable $x,$ and the absolute value would change its coefficient, and nothing else.
Since we know that the function is continuous, we have that from $f_2011(1)$ to $f_2011(2)$ that the slope is $-1.$ We know that from there, even if it it has a slope of $1$ $f_2011(2)$ to infinity, it would still be an parallel line that never intersects. That means for every real number greater than $2,$ since $y=x$ can't intersect with $f_2011(x),$ $x=1$ is the greatest solution $boxedtextQ.E.D..$
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
We claim that $1$ is the highest value for which $f_2011(x)=x.$
Let $f_a(x)$ represent $|1-|2-|3-|4-...-|a-x|...||||.$
We look for a pattern to calculate $f_2011(1).$
Take note that for $c>4,$ we have $f_c(1)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-2(|(c-1)-(c-1)|)=f_c-2(0)=f_c-3(|c-3|)=f_c-3(c-3)=f_c-4((c-4)-(c-3))=f_c-4(|-1|)=f_c-4(1).$
Applying this repeatedly gives $f_2011(1)=f_2007(1)=f_2003(1)=...=f_3(1)=|3-|2-|1-1|||=|3-|2-0||=|3-2|=1.$ Therefore, $f_2011(x)=x$ is satisfied for $x=1.$
Now we will prove that that is the maximum possible value of $x$ which can work.
We will evaluate $f_2011(2).$ We let $d$ be a positive integer such that $g<4.$ We will start to evaluate $f_a(2)$. Calculating, we have $f_a(2)=f_a-1(|a-2|)=f_a-1(a-2)=f_a-2(|(a-1)-(a-2)|)=f_a-2(1).$ Applying this, we get $f_2011(2)=f_2009(1)=f_1(1)=|1-1|=0.$
We know that the slope of the absolute value is $-1$ or $1$ since there is just one variable $x,$ and the absolute value would change its coefficient, and nothing else.
Since we know that the function is continuous, we have that from $f_2011(1)$ to $f_2011(2)$ that the slope is $-1.$ We know that from there, even if it it has a slope of $1$ $f_2011(2)$ to infinity, it would still be an parallel line that never intersects. That means for every real number greater than $2,$ since $y=x$ can't intersect with $f_2011(x),$ $x=1$ is the greatest solution $boxedtextQ.E.D..$
We claim that $1$ is the highest value for which $f_2011(x)=x.$
Let $f_a(x)$ represent $|1-|2-|3-|4-...-|a-x|...||||.$
We look for a pattern to calculate $f_2011(1).$
Take note that for $c>4,$ we have $f_c(1)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-1(|c-1|)=f_c-2(|(c-1)-(c-1)|)=f_c-2(0)=f_c-3(|c-3|)=f_c-3(c-3)=f_c-4((c-4)-(c-3))=f_c-4(|-1|)=f_c-4(1).$
Applying this repeatedly gives $f_2011(1)=f_2007(1)=f_2003(1)=...=f_3(1)=|3-|2-|1-1|||=|3-|2-0||=|3-2|=1.$ Therefore, $f_2011(x)=x$ is satisfied for $x=1.$
Now we will prove that that is the maximum possible value of $x$ which can work.
We will evaluate $f_2011(2).$ We let $d$ be a positive integer such that $g<4.$ We will start to evaluate $f_a(2)$. Calculating, we have $f_a(2)=f_a-1(|a-2|)=f_a-1(a-2)=f_a-2(|(a-1)-(a-2)|)=f_a-2(1).$ Applying this, we get $f_2011(2)=f_2009(1)=f_1(1)=|1-1|=0.$
We know that the slope of the absolute value is $-1$ or $1$ since there is just one variable $x,$ and the absolute value would change its coefficient, and nothing else.
Since we know that the function is continuous, we have that from $f_2011(1)$ to $f_2011(2)$ that the slope is $-1.$ We know that from there, even if it it has a slope of $1$ $f_2011(2)$ to infinity, it would still be an parallel line that never intersects. That means for every real number greater than $2,$ since $y=x$ can't intersect with $f_2011(x),$ $x=1$ is the greatest solution $boxedtextQ.E.D..$
answered Aug 29 at 13:43
Jason Kim
50516
50516
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2897920%2fif-x-in-mathbbr-such-1-2-3-4-cdots-2011-x-cdots-x%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52
@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02
Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
â Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03
@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
â saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12
If a solution $x$ is larger than $1$, it must be giant. Indeed, if $x = |1-|2-|ldots||| > 1$, then $|2-|ldots|| > 2$. So, $|3-|ldots|| > 4$ and hence $|4 - |ldots|| > 7$ and so on.
â amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28