Mexico - A Nice Math Olympiad Exponential Problem

This is why I'm going back to watching cooking videos.

I feel the quick way to approach this problem is to recognise that we have a polynomial where both y^3 and y exist. This should ring a bell that we should find some cubed number somewhere. We can write 130 = 125 + 5 = 5^3 + 5. That's it. Immediately we get y^3 - 5^3 + y - 5 = 0, or (y -5)(y^2 + 5y + 26) = 0, where y = 2^x. Here onwards, it is simple.

At the end you can simply apply the definition of logarithm... 2^x = 5 ---> x is the power to wich the base 2 must be raised in order to obtain 5 so you can write: x = log2(5)

130=26×5=(5^2+1)×5=5^3+5; 8^x+2^x=(2^x)^3+(2^x); 2^x=5 My high school math teacher used to tell me,to understand an equation better you need to dis-simplify the brief side other than to simplify the complex side.

FASTER APPROACH : 8^x+2^x is always increasing function, hence one root only. Setting x equal to some numbers, we realize that x is between 2 and 3. Consequently,y is between 4 and 8, but y is obviously less than 6 by analyzing cubic equation. So y is between 4 and 6, try 5 and we get that y=5. Everything can be solved in mind.

All these problems seem a little too easy for olympiads

Me given IIT 20 yrs back and working in IT from 15+ yrs still willing to learn this so that I can teach my kid. Feels like back to square one. 😂 happy learning guys.

Change of bases can be used to simplify the final expression 8^log_2(5) = (2^log_2(5))^3 by associativity and commutativity =5^3 since x^log_x(a) = a =125 And the same with the other term, so 125+5 = 130

Instead of using decimals you could have used more logarithmic identities when you were checking. I think that would have been cleaner.

I did it like this... 2^(3x)+2^x=130 Let 2^x=y Then y³+y=130 By observation, y=5 Hence 2^x=5 X=log(2)5, ie log 5 base 2 Overall, this problem was on the easier side if it's from olympiad, as I and my friends (Indian high-school students) were able to solve it pretty easily 😅

We will also have complex values of x... Since we have a cubic polynomial y^3+y-130=0, it will therefore have 3 roots out of which 1 is real (log5/log2) and other two are complex Other two values of x hence will be: x=log(5+- isqrt71)/2/log2

Just subtract 130 from both sides and solve for the x-intercepts of the equation 8^x + 2^x - 130 = y. When y= 0 the graph intercepts the x axis.

Incredible how much effort you put in this. 130=5³+5¹ and this is identical to your y³+y. Therefore y = 2^x = 5. => x = log2 (5). Easy.

For all functions of type f(x)=ax^3+bx+c the equation f(x)=0 can have only one real root in case of a>0, b>0, because f'(x)=3ax^2+b>0 and therefore f(x) is monotonically increasing. Also, if the equation f(x)=0 has rational roots in the form p/q, p is a divisor of c and q is a divisor of a. If a=1, the rational roots are always whole numbers. One can immediately see that in the specific example f(y)=y^3+y-130=0 , y=5 is a solution, because we first check the whole divisors of 130 (+-1, +-2, +-5, +-10, +-13). Try to solve x^7+x^5+x^3+x=170 with your method....No chance. With above, you show that x=2 is the only root in just 2 rows.

Before watching: This is not one that can be easily solved by simply plugging in integers and hoping for a result. Our solution is going to be somewhere between 2 (8^2 + 2^2 = 64+4=68) and 3 (8^3 + 2^3 = 512+8 = 520), and probably closer to 2 than to 3. Therefore, we have to actually do some calculations. Alright, 8 = 2^3, and (a^b)^c = a^(bc). Thus 8^x = (2^3)^x = 2^(3x). We declare U = 2^x. Then 8^x = 2^(3x) = u^3. Then we have u^3 + u = 130. Subtract 130 from both sides to get u^3+u-130=0. Now, we attempt to factor this. The factors of 130 are 1, 2, 5, 10, and 13. Of those, U=10 gives us results far too large, and U=2 gives us ones far too small. U=5 gives us 125+5-130 = 0, which is accurate. Thus, (u-5) is a factor. after doing some division, we can factor the equation into (u-5)(u^2 + 5u + 26 )=0. Going to use the quadratic formula on the second factor, we note that the discriminant is negative. Thus, these are not real roots, so we can skip this section. Thus, we will go with U=5. However, we're not done! That's the solution for U, not for X. U = 2^x. Thus, we have 2^x = 5. Take log_2 of both sides: Log_2(2^x) = log_2(5) -> X = log_2(5) Log_2 of 5 will be between log_2 of 4 (2) and log_2 of 8 (3), likely closer to 2 than 3. This checks out. If you want to change this to a different log using change of base, you may do so. log_b(a) = (log_c(a))/(log_c(b)),. Then using natural log ln, with a =5 and b = 2: x = (ln 5)/(ln2). (We're not doing this for the sake of precision, but rather so it can be easily checked on a calculator. A lot of calculators don't have functions built into them for logs of different bases, at least not ones that you can get to easily. Thus, you have to switch to either common log (log_10) or natural log (log_e))

I remember fondly a time where maybe, just maybe, I might have had some idea, but I haven’t used anything beyond grade 9 algebra in 20 years.

First observe that 8^x=(2^3)^x=(2^x)^3. Then set 2^x=y and you get the equation: y^3+y=y*(y^2+1)=130. A few trials gives y=5 and thus x=ln(5)/ln(2)=log(5)/log(2).

I loved my Math's Teacher Sir A Hameed Wayn, in Metric Class ... And after him, you are the 2nd one, whom I would like to praise .. Since my First Teacher changed the School , and just for Mathematics I followed him to that school. From there, you can see my love for Mathematics . Liked your V-Log ... Though i dont know your name .

This is why I know anatomy so well!

2^log²5 = 5 (by definition) 8^log²5 = (2^3)^log²5= (2^log²5)^3= 5^3=125 There is no need to do approximete calculations.