1972 IMO Problems/Problem 4
Find all solutions of the system of inequalities
where
are positive real numbers.
Solution
Add the five inequalities together to get
Expanding, multiplying by , and re-combining terms, we get
Every term is , so every term must
.
From the first term, we can deduce that .
From the second term,
.
From the third term, . From the fourth term,
.
Therefore, is the only solution.
Borrowed from [1]
Solution 2
This solution is longer and less elegant than the previous one, but it is more direct, and based on a different idea, so it is worth mentioning.
Looking at the first inequality as an example, we can see that we have either
and
(we will call this a "direct" pair of inequalities)
or
and
(we will call this an "inverted" pair of inequalities)
We have a similar conclusion from the other four inequalities. So, we have to look at six cases:
1. all five inequalities imply 5 "direct" pairs of inequalities
2. the five inequalities imply 4 "direct" pairs and 1 "inverted" pair
3. the five inequalities imply 3 "direct" pairs and 2 "inverted" pairs
4. the five inequalities imply 2 "direct" pairs and 3 "inverted" pairs
5. the five inequalities imply 1 "direct" pair and 4 "inverted" pairs
6. all five inequalities imply 5 "inverted" pairs of inequalities
Solving the problem in cases 4, 5, 6 is similar to solving it in
cases 3, 2, 1 respectively; indeed, all we have to do is switch
and
. So, we will solve the system of inequalities in cases
1, 2, 3.
In case 1, we have
(1l) and (1r) imply , and we have four similar inequalities
from the other four rows. Putting them together, we obtain
which implies (remember that
are
positive).
For case 2, let us look at the particular situation when the first pair of inequalities is "inverted":
Just like in case 1, this implies
(4r) and (5l) imply . Combining this with (6),
we obtain
. From this we deduce
. Combining this with (6) again, we get
.
Now, (2r) and (3l) imply , which implies
(because
). Combining with (6) again, it
follows that
.
If the "inverted" pair is the 2nd row, we can make the substitution
. In the new
variables, the 1st row would contain the "inverted" pair, so our
proof applies. If the "inverted" pair is in the 3rd, 4th or 5th
row, we just repeat this substitution as many times as needed to
reduce the system of inequalities to the one we already solved.
This finishes the proof in case 2.
For case 3, let us look at the particular situation when the first two pairs of inequalities are "inverted":
Just like in case 1, this implies
Now, (3r) and (4l) imply , and (4r) and (5l)
imply
. This implies
,
so
. Using (8), it follows that
.
Now, (2l) and (1r) imply . Simplifying with
, we get
. Combining this with (7) and (8),
we get
.
Note that by applying the substitution described in case 2 as many times as needed, we can always assume that one of the "inverted" pairs is in the 1st row. Furthermore, if the "inverted" pairs are in the 1st and 5th rows, we can make a substitution which makes the "inverted" pairs of inequalities be in the 1st and 2nd rows (1st becomes 2nd, and 5th becomes 1st).
So we have to consider 2 more situations for case 3: the "inverted" pairs are in the 1st and 3rd rows, and the "inverted" pairs are in the 1st and 4th rows. The proof in each of these situations goes along the same lines as the one we just gave, and we will not go into these details, but leave them to the diligent reader.
[Solution by pf02, May 2025]
See Also
1972 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 3 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 5 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |