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

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1












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
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$







share|cite|improve this question






















  • Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 3:52










  • @JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
    – saulspatz
    Aug 29 at 4:02










  • Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 4:28














up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1












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
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$







share|cite|improve this question






















  • Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 3:52










  • @JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
    – saulspatz
    Aug 29 at 4:02










  • Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 4:28












up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
3
down vote

favorite
1






1





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
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$







share|cite|improve this question














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
$$f(0)=0,f(1)=1,f(2)=0$$









share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








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 $0,1.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 3:52










  • @JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
    – saulspatz
    Aug 29 at 4:02










  • Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 4:28
















  • Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 3:52










  • @JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
    – saulspatz
    Aug 29 at 4:02










  • Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 4:28















Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
– Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52




Well, using Desmos, I have an idea that the maximum is at most $0,1.$
– Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 3:52












@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
– saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02




@JasonKim How did you write the formula to get it into Desmos?
– saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:02












Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
– Jason Kim
Aug 29 at 4:03




Like $left|1-left(left|2-left(left|3-left(4-xright)right|right)right|right)right|$
– 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.
– saulspatz
Aug 29 at 4:12




@JasonKim I should have realized that. I thought you had some magic way to enter the whole thing.
– 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.
– 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.
– amsmath
Aug 29 at 4:28










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 $4$.






share|cite|improve this answer






















  • Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 13:46










  • What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 15:52










  • $N=1+2+3...+2011$
    – 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.
    – 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 $2011.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 30 at 0:12

















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 $boxedtextQ.E.D..$






share|cite|improve this answer




















    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',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    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






























    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 $4$.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 29 at 13:46










    • What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
      – amsmath
      Aug 29 at 15:52










    • $N=1+2+3...+2011$
      – 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.
      – 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 $2011.$
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 30 at 0:12














    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 $4$.






    share|cite|improve this answer






















    • Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 29 at 13:46










    • What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
      – amsmath
      Aug 29 at 15:52










    • $N=1+2+3...+2011$
      – 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.
      – 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 $2011.$
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 30 at 0:12












    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 $4$.






    share|cite|improve this answer














    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 $4$.







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    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...
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 29 at 13:46










    • What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
      – amsmath
      Aug 29 at 15:52










    • $N=1+2+3...+2011$
      – 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.
      – 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 $2011.$
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 30 at 0:12
















    • Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 29 at 13:46










    • What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
      – amsmath
      Aug 29 at 15:52










    • $N=1+2+3...+2011$
      – 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.
      – 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 $2011.$
      – Jason Kim
      Aug 30 at 0:12















    Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 13:46




    Why must $x$ be so large? I can't tell...
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 13:46












    What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 15:52




    What is it you don't understand in my reasoning?
    – amsmath
    Aug 29 at 15:52












    $N=1+2+3...+2011$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 29 at 21:21




    $N=1+2+3...+2011$
    – 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.
    – 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.
    – 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 $2011.$
    – 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 $2011.$
    – Jason Kim
    Aug 30 at 0:12










    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 $boxedtextQ.E.D..$






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      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 $boxedtextQ.E.D..$






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        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 $boxedtextQ.E.D..$






        share|cite|improve this answer












        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 $boxedtextQ.E.D..$







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Aug 29 at 13:43









        Jason Kim

        50516




        50516



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            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













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            tkz-euclide: tkzDrawCircle[R] not working

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            1st Magritte Awards