• Congratulations to the Class of 2024 on your results!
    Let us know how you went here
    Got a question about your uni preferences? Ask us here

HSC 2014 MX2 Marathon ADVANCED (archive) (3 Viewers)

Status
Not open for further replies.

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

A little hard for the lower level marathon but a little easier for this level:

If



then



Noting that the penultimate term is just , induction does the trick.
 

TL1998

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
39
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Find:

lim ((2n)! / (n!n^n))^(1/n)
n->infinity
 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Let



Then by log laws we have



But the limit of this expression as is exactly the definition of the integral of log(x) between 1 and 2!

So since the exponential function is continuous, we get

 

TL1998

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
39
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Let



Then by log laws we have



But the limit of this expression as is exactly the definition of the integral of log(x) between 1 and 2!

So since the exponential function is continuous, we get

that's what i did. This was question's clearly too easy for the advanced thread. Here's another one which is a little hard for the normal thread but easier than the rest of the questions here.

A function f(x) is integral e --> 1 abs(t-x) e^t dt (0<=x<=1) . Find f(x) and the x value which gives its minimum value.
 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

that's what i did. This was question's clearly too easy for the advanced thread. Here's another one which is a little hard for the normal thread but easier than the rest of the questions here.

A function f(x) is integral e --> 1 abs(t-x) e^t dt (0<=x<=1) . Find f(x) and the x value which gives its minimum value.
Am a bit confused by your notation here, you should use LaTeX!

Anyway, presuming my guess at what you mean is right (and that the absolute values are irrelevant because x =< 1):



which is minimised at x=1, because the slope of this line is negative. (Unless you meant integrating from e to 1, in which case change sign of the above and x=0 gives the minimum).

This seems too easy though, so let me know if you meant something else.
 

TL1998

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
39
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

when i say abs(t-x), i'm talking the absolute value of it. so |t-x|. and sorry i meant integrate 1 to 0, with the 1 on top. Don't know why i put an e.


also, contrary to what you had stated, the absolute values do play a role.

To help you, here's the value of f(x): 2e^x -(e+1)x-1
 
Last edited:

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

when i say abs(t-x), i'm talking the absolute value of it. so |t-x|. and sorry i meant integrate 1 to 0, with the 1 on top. Don't know why i put an e.


also, contrary to what you had stated, the absolute values do play a role.

To help you, here's the value of f(x): 2e^x -(e+1)x-1
In the question you originally posted, absolute values didn't play a role. t went between 1 and e and x was smaller than 1. So t-x was always positive.

After you changed the interval of integration, of course the absolute values matter. Now we do the following:





where



is a primitive of the integrand.

Then by differentiating f, we find that it is stationary at



And this is the minimum, because f'' > 0 for 0 < x < 1.
 
Last edited:

TL1998

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
39
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

In the question you originally posted, absolute values didn't play a role. t went between 1 and e and x was smaller than 1. So t-x was always positive.

After you changed the interval of integration, of course the absolute values matter. Now we do the following:







where



is a primitive of the integrand.

Then by differentiating f, we find that it is stationary at



And this is the minimum, because f'' > 0 for 0 < x < 1.
Our methods are different, but our answers are the same. Since Sy123 seems to be busy, i'll just post more questions.

Given x>1 or <1/2 and n is an integer, prove the following

(1+ x/(x-1) )^n >= 1+nx/(x-1)
 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Our methods are different, but our answers are the same. Since Sy123 seems to be busy, i'll just post more questions.

Given x>1 or <1/2 and n is an integer, prove the following

(1+ x/(x-1) )^n >= 1+nx/(x-1)
Thanks for the questions!

It's easy to show that



by multiplying out and solving the quadratic inequality.

So I only need to show that



for y > -1 and all integers n.

This comes from observing that is a concave up function for (from graphs we have drawn for a long time, or by taking second derivatives), and so the tangent line to this curve at lies below this curve for all .

Since the derivative of at 1 is , the above fact translates to



for all as required.
 

TL1998

Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
39
Gender
Male
HSC
2016
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Yep, that also works. note that equality holds iff x=0.

given 0<x<y, determine which of (1+x)^y or (1+y)^x is larger
 
Last edited:

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

I think this is only necessarily true if a,b,c,d are positive so I will make that assumption.

For real , the polynomial



is non-negative and so must have non-positive discriminant.

This implies that



upon simplification. (This is called the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality and is very famous).

Now a simple application of Cauchy-Schwartz gives us



but our assumption that a+b+c+d=1 implies that the second factor on the LHS is 2 and that the RHS is 1.

So we are left with

 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

I didn't assume anything from beyond the course though did I? I just mentioned the name of an intermediate thing I proved.

I proved everything using that squares are non-negative and that non-negative quadratics have non-positive discriminant...this is surely okay?
 

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

I didn't assume anything from beyond the course though did I? I just mentioned the name of an intermediate thing I proved.

I proved everything using that squares are non-negative and that non-negative quadratics have non-positive discriminant...this is surely okay?
I think what TL1998 was going for is that if you knew only what the 4U course would teach you, how would you do it. Cauchy Schwarz although can be proven with 4U methods is not taught nor is it an inequality that is entirely obvious
 

dunjaaa

Active Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
473
Gender
Male
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Does anyone know a book that has deeper complex numbers/polynomial theoretical styled problems like the 2011 Extension 2 HSC Exam Q8 (c). If so, please let us know :p.
 

Carrotsticks

Retired
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
9,494
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Does anyone know a book that has deeper complex numbers/polynomial theoretical styled problems like the 2011 Extension 2 HSC Exam Q8 (c). If so, please let us know :p.
There are many books on polynomials containing those kinds of properties (bounding locations of roots, it's actually something I personally find fascinating). However, a lot of them need some understanding and knowledge of higher powered machinery such as Rouche's Theorem, which is one of the core theorems in the refinement of polynomial root locations.

Some fairly loose bounds on polynomial roots can be established without those tools (like 2011 HSC) but they are usually too insignificant to have a dedicated problem set for.

If you look up in google "Integer Polynomials", there is a paper that has a whole lot of these properties (including the 2011 HSC one I believe) but like I said, there are few such books out there with totally elementary proofs. If I recall correctly, there is a book on Polynomials by Barbeau that may have some of these problems.

In 2012 BOS Trials, the very last question establishes a fairly tight bound on the roots of polynomials.
 

glittergal96

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2014
Messages
418
Gender
Female
HSC
2014
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

I think what TL1998 was going for is that if you knew only what the 4U course would teach you, how would you do it. Cauchy Schwarz although can be proven with 4U methods is not taught nor is it an inequality that is entirely obvious
Ah right, I see what you mean. (Our teacher did show us it though as a useful inequality to know and know how to prove, like AM-GM-HM.)

Do you know if I would lose any marks for having a solution like that? fleshed out a bit in an actual exam.
 

Sy123

This too shall pass
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
3,730
Gender
Male
HSC
2013
Re: HSC 2014 4U Marathon - Advanced Level

Ah right, I see what you mean. (Our teacher did show us it though as a useful inequality to know and know how to prove, like AM-GM-HM.)

Do you know if I would lose any marks for having a solution like that? fleshed out a bit in an actual exam.
I do not think you would lose any marks

I would ask Carrotsticks for confirmation though
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top