Which is greater? Part 2 - - With cube roots

lookagain

Elite Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Messages
3,187
This is in regards to this thread:

Jomo was fortunate with his method, because the cube of the left-hand side equals 54.

\(\displaystyle A = \ \sqrt[3]{58} \ \ \ and \ \ \ B = \ 1 + 2\sqrt[3]{3}\)

Without using a calculator or computer, show which is greater, A or B.
 
This is in regards to this thread:

Jomo was fortunate with his method, because the cube of the left-hand side equals 54.

\(\displaystyle A = \ \sqrt[3]{58} \ \ \ and \ \ \ B = \ 1 + 2\sqrt[3]{3}\)

Without using a calculator or computer, show which is greater, A or B.
Can I use slide rule? I have one!
 
\(\displaystyle A = \ \sqrt[3]{58} \ \ \ and \ \ \ B = \ 1 + 2\sqrt[3]{3}\)

Without using a calculator or computer, show which is greater, A or B.

Here's how I would do it:

\(\displaystyle A = \sqrt[3]{58} = 58^{\frac{1}{3}} \implies \ln(A) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(58)\)

\(\displaystyle B - 1 = 2\sqrt[3]{3} = 2 \cdot 3^{\frac{1}{3}} \implies \ln(B - 1) = \ln(2) + \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(3)\)

\(\displaystyle A - (B - 1) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(58) - \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(3) - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \left[\ln(58) - \ln(3) \right] - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - \ln(2)\)

\(\displaystyle A - B = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - 1 - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - \ln(2e)\)

Now I'll use some crude approximations and known facts to bound these numbers.

\(\displaystyle (e > 2) \wedge (2 > 1) \implies e < 2e < e^2 \implies 1 < \ln(2e) < 2 \implies 3 < \ln(2e) < 6\)

\(\displaystyle e \approx 2.7 \implies e^3 \approx 2.7^3 = 19.683\)

\(\displaystyle \frac{58}{3} = 19.\overline{33} \implies \frac{58}{3} < e^3\)

The natural log function is monotonically increasing for \(x > 0\) (if desired this can be a calculator-free subproof involving the derivative) so that means:

\(\displaystyle \frac{58}{3} < e^3 \implies \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) < \ln(e^3) \implies \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) < 3\)

From this I can conclude that:

\(\displaystyle \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) < 3\ln(2e) \implies \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) < \ln(2e)\)

Both \(\frac{58}{3}\) and \(2e\) are greater than 1, so their natural logs must be positive. Putting everything together, we have:

\(\displaystyle A - B = (\text{A positive number}) - (\text{A bigger positive number}) < 0\)

And thus, \(B\) must be the bigger of the two numbers.
 
This is in regards to this thread:

Jomo was fortunate with his method, because the cube of the left-hand side equals 54.

\(\displaystyle A = \ \sqrt[3]{58} \ \ \ and \ \ \ B = \ 1 + 2\sqrt[3]{3}\)

Without using a calculator or computer, show which is greater, A or B.
Yes, I was very lucky. Now understand that this was a test question that has to be done within a time limit so I think that my method *had to work*, otherwise the problem was unfair.

Now your question is entirely different and will take some thoughtl
Thanks for posting it.
 
Here is my solution and I did not use a slide ruler although I did use a calculator to find 3rt(3) which I could have approximated by hand
 

Attachments

  • PTDC0039.JPG
    PTDC0039.JPG
    675.6 KB · Views: 6
Here's how I would do it:

\(\displaystyle A = \sqrt[3]{58} = 58^{\frac{1}{3}} \implies \ln(A) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(58)\)

\(\displaystyle B - 1 = 2\sqrt[3]{3} = 2 \cdot 3^{\frac{1}{3}} \implies \ln(B - 1) = \ln(2) + \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(3)\)

\(\displaystyle A - (B - 1) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(58) - \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln(3) - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \left[\ln(58) - \ln(3) \right] - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - \ln(2)\)

\(\displaystyle A - B = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - 1 - \ln(2) = \frac{1}{3} \cdot \ln \left( \frac{58}{3} \right) - \ln(2e)\)

I did not read beyond these lines, because of the far left ends of lines three and four.
It would make sense if line three began "ln(A) - ln(B - 1)," and if line four began
"ln(A) - ln(B)."

Because of editing time restrictions for that post of yours, perhaps if you were to copy-and-paste your
whole post and make amendments, and then post that, I could read that through.
 
Last edited:
Here is my solution and I did not use a slide ruler although I did use a calculator to find 3rt(3) which I could have approximated by hand


You missed an expected opportunity, after the fifth line, to divide each side by 3,
before cubing each side, for instance.
 
Last edited:
...It would make sense if line three began "ln(A) - ln(B - 1)," and if line four began
"ln(A) - ln(B)."

Augh! You're correct. This means that nothing I did works out. I got the correct answer, but only purely by coincidence. I'll give it some more thought and maybe something will come to me, but I don't see any way of correcting that. I can't say anything meaningful about \(A - B\) based on \(\ln(A) - \ln(B - 1) - 1\)
 
Top