Can Jow Forums solve this without googling the answer?

Can Jow Forums solve this without googling the answer?

Attached: 919C5498-D132-4250-8FD6-E96AE91A9E97.jpg (367x255, 18K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x/(y+z)+y/(x+z)+z/(x+y)=4
wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve x/(y+z)+y/(x+z)+z/(x+y)=4 over the positive integers
quora.com/How-do-you-find-the-positive-integer-solutions-to-frac-x-y z- -frac-y-z x- -frac-z-x y-4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

sure, ran it through wolfram alpha

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=x/(y+z)+y/(x+z)+z/(x+y)=4

do your own homework, underage

No, and neither can you. Maybe 5% of maths proffesors could do it without first googling the method

That is not a solution.
The question didn't ask for expressing z in other variables, but for an integer solution.

11, 9, -5

wolframalpha.com/input/?i=solve x/(y+z)+y/(x+z)+z/(x+y)=4 over the positive integers

...

-5 isn't a natural number

Is -5 a POSITIVE integer?

try using elisp to solve the problem interactively within the best text editor on gods green earth

More than 95% of people cannot solve this. In fact, prossibly only a few uni mathematicians could possibly solve this. The solution involves elliptical functions and 80 digits numbers.

This.
In fact, the guy who made that pic did so as a joke, an actually hard parody of those idiotic meme problems people share on Facebook.

I remember googling this shit an a forum for math students came up. And even there it was considered a hard problem.

0
no google requried

Attached: 1556265495847.png (554x400, 68K)

sure is fucking summer

...

Attached: 1563137446856.png (680x412, 78K)

This shit is integer programming. 99+% definitely can't solve this.

Gotta love NP-Complete problems.

Even with python and wolfram alpha I can't solve this. I tried a program that guesses and checks but it took too long.

Someone wiling to run this through maxima?

7, 1, 1 in any combination.

Since the question is "Can you...?" maybe simply the correct answer is "No"?

That'll give you 3.75 not 4

And the remaining 95% will waste their time trying to solve it.

>having fun with hard math on a sunday
>wasting time
pick one

Maxima's solve apparently can't do it, and I do not actually know if it implements solvers for dipohantine equations, which after all is a highly non-trivial area of mathematics.

Three variables, one equation is pretty hard

Well, usually it just means that there are many solutions.

If you are doing it by brute force, you are going to run between (around) 10^80 and 10^240 combinations before you find a valid one. So good luck.
If you are somehow optimizing it, then chances are that you are already halfway through an analytical solution.

As far as I am aware, there might be an infinite number of solutions, but it is not been proven.
On the other hand, the smallest solution possible are very big numbers, so in this case "many solutions" barely says anything about the difficulty of solving the problem.

Obviously not, but number of variable vs. number of equationsalso says nothing in general about difficulty.

I can't tell if this is bait, but I'll bite, it's an impossible problem to solve, any steps you took were in the wrong direction. If this were a solvable problem it wouldn't be hard, but as it stands it's not mathematically possible, and anyone who doesn't know that immediately from looking right at it isn't in a very good position to say what would be hard or easy because they probably haven't made it through 9th grade algebra, because that's about the time you learn that you need a system of equations to solve for more than one variable.

Maybe you had fun with it, and I'm happy for you, but that fun is equivalent to a child who is trying to smash the square block in the circle hole.

It is possible to solve, just not with elementary algebra. It requires very advanced knowledge in number theory.
You can lookup the solution around the internet.

Based game-theorists.

4 #= (Apple / (Bannana + Pineapple)) + (Bannana / (Apple + Pineapple)) + (Pineapple / (Apple + Bannana)).

Apple = _#99(0..268435455)
Ban = _#21(0..268435455)
Pine = _#39(0..268435455)

Prolog (with clpfd) seems to think this is unsolveable (at least within prolog integers).

>If this were a solvable problem it wouldn't be hard, but as it stands it's not mathematically possible,
It has been solved, read the thread, unless you meant its mathematically impossible for brainlets to solve it

>it's an impossible problem to solve
No, it is not.
Even if it had no solution proving that it has none would be what you want to do.

>because that's about the time you learn that you need a system of equations to solve for more than one variable.
That is THOROUGHLY wrong and HIGHLY misinformed, I can very easily give you systems of equations with the same number of variables that have zero or infinitely many solutions.

It is in fact very obvious that this problem has infinitely many solutions in the REAL NUMBERS, the question for solution in the positive integers is very much different and related to quite advanced areas of mathematics.

good enough

It's funny seeing mathlets btfo'ing themselves while acting like they know it all

Try 36, 1949 and 7413

he protecc
he atacc
but most important:
he INEXACC

276858026332/69214506465 =!= 4

yes, i can find the answer in my browser history. takes about 10 minutes to read and 10 years to understand.

quora.com/How-do-you-find-the-positive-integer-solutions-to-frac-x-y z- -frac-y-z x- -frac-z-x y-4

Close enough

These dumb facebook memes really give me the shits. Girls who flunked high school maths post this up on Facebook and ask if anyone is a genius as though these stupid "there was only one banana on the last line" tricks are meaningful.

Attached: mathsdog.jpg (480x960, 45K)

TREE(1) - 1
TREE(2) - 3
TREE(3) - ?

>10 years to understand
I took a one semester course on Elliptic curve cryptography (with pretty much no background in number theory and very little algebra) and I basically got pretty much everything.
Just read the first two chapters on some book on the topic and you are good to at least understand everything that is going on in the quora article.

7
cus
Tree(n) = 2^n-1

Touché

0,1,2+root(3)
sad how math in muricaland is so shit.

Attached: D_25VByXoAEqzbN.jpg (1000x1500, 147K)

>just like read about what you don't understand and then you'll understand it
it really is actually that easy, but I tell this to normies all the time and their autopilot doesn't have a protocol to parse it

Can't i use gauss newton for finding the "solution"?

Nevermind, they must be integer.
Then i guess it can be solved with integer linear programming maybe

no.

here's a paper on this equation...

ami.ektf.hu/uploads/papers/finalpdf/AMI_43_from29to41.pdf

"An unusual cubic representation problem"

>3 variables
>1 equation in the system

have sex yikes seething incel tranny libtard Jow Forums nigger cringe based kino goty soul faggot underage summerfag sauce newfag jannie sweety pepe brainlet wojak apu gondola fembot trap sage general pajeet chink tyrone kike nazi lgbt sticky

room temperature iq [ºF]

cool, thanks for that

95% of people think you're a hacker when you type "dir" or "ls" into a command prompt. Rather than just reading what it says...
who cares.

Found the engineer

Thanks for the filter user

Just to get retards to stop replying to this thread, this is a high level diophantine equation problem expressed as a Facebook meme, the positive integer solutions are like 80 digits and the mathematical tools to solve it were invented very recently. You need to use Mathematica or something to solve it.

Read more here
quora.com/How-do-you-find-the-positive-integer-solutions-to-frac-x-y z- -frac-y-z x- -frac-z-x y-4

is the answer 4?

based

It's not possible, to solve it you need at least 3 equations.
Any number variables need same number of equations to be solved.

either a good bait or an elementary schooler

This was actually in my calculus exam, albeit we had Matlab as used in Quora link.