How do I show this $xyleq frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^q.$ without using concavity of log function?
let reals $p, q >1$ and $x, y$ are positive real numbers with $1/p+1/q=1$ I want to show $xyleq frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^q.$ without using concavity of $log$ as shown below
Proof with concavity of log function and exponential Growth
$lnleft(frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^qright)geq frac{1}{p}lnleft(x^pright)+frac{1}{q}lnleft(y^qright)=lnleft(xyright).$
just to raise expon for both side we get the result .
then any other method ?
inequality convex-analysis holder-inequality
add a comment |
let reals $p, q >1$ and $x, y$ are positive real numbers with $1/p+1/q=1$ I want to show $xyleq frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^q.$ without using concavity of $log$ as shown below
Proof with concavity of log function and exponential Growth
$lnleft(frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^qright)geq frac{1}{p}lnleft(x^pright)+frac{1}{q}lnleft(y^qright)=lnleft(xyright).$
just to raise expon for both side we get the result .
then any other method ?
inequality convex-analysis holder-inequality
1
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42
add a comment |
let reals $p, q >1$ and $x, y$ are positive real numbers with $1/p+1/q=1$ I want to show $xyleq frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^q.$ without using concavity of $log$ as shown below
Proof with concavity of log function and exponential Growth
$lnleft(frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^qright)geq frac{1}{p}lnleft(x^pright)+frac{1}{q}lnleft(y^qright)=lnleft(xyright).$
just to raise expon for both side we get the result .
then any other method ?
inequality convex-analysis holder-inequality
let reals $p, q >1$ and $x, y$ are positive real numbers with $1/p+1/q=1$ I want to show $xyleq frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^q.$ without using concavity of $log$ as shown below
Proof with concavity of log function and exponential Growth
$lnleft(frac{1}{p}x^p+frac{1}{q}y^qright)geq frac{1}{p}lnleft(x^pright)+frac{1}{q}lnleft(y^qright)=lnleft(xyright).$
just to raise expon for both side we get the result .
then any other method ?
inequality convex-analysis holder-inequality
inequality convex-analysis holder-inequality
asked Dec 26 '18 at 22:42
zeraoulia rafik
2,38411029
2,38411029
1
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42
add a comment |
1
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42
1
1
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
Method 1:
For non-negative $u,v$ let $f(u)=u^{p-1}$ and $g(v)=v^{q-1}.$ Since $(p-1)(q-1)=1,$ the graphs of $(u,f(u))$ and of $(g(v),v)$ are the same graph, which I will call $G.$
Now $x^p/p=int_0^xf(u)du$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)]$ and the $u$-axis in the $(u,v)$-plane. And $y^q/q=int_0^yg(y)dy$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and $[0, g(y)]times {y}$ and the $v$-axis.
If $x^p=y^q,$ the union of these two figures is the rectangle $R(x,y)$ with corners $(0,0),(0,y),(x,y),(x,0),$ which has area $xy,$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yg(v)dv=xy.$
If $x>y^{q/p}$ then the union of these two figures is $R(x,y)$ plus a region bounded by $G$, the $u$-axis, and the segments ${y^{q/p}}times [0,y]$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)],$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{y^{q/p}}^x f(u)du>xy$.
Similarly if $x<y^{p/q}$ then $y>x^{q/p}$ and $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{x^{q/p}}^y g(v)dv>xy.$
This is easy to see on a diagram.
Generally, if $f:[0,infty)to [0,infty)$ is continuous and strictly monotonic, and $f(0)=0,$ then $xyleq int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yf^{-1}(v)dv.$
Method 2:
For non-negative $x,y$ let $H(x,y)=x^p/p+y^q/q-xy.$ Then $frac {partial H(x,y)}{partial x}=frac1px^{p-1}-y,$ which is negative if $0leq x^{p-1}<y$ and positive if $x^{p-1}>y.$ So for a fixed $y,$ the function $H(x,y)$ has its minimum when $x^{p-1}=y.$ And we have $H(x, x^{p-1})=0.$
add a comment |
This proof is from Steele's Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. The weighted AM-GM inequality gives us
begin{align*}
u^alpha v^beta le frac{alpha}{alpha + beta}u^{alpha + beta} + frac{beta}{alpha + beta}v^{alpha + beta}
end{align*}
for $u, v ge 0$ and $alpha, beta > 0$. Substituting $x = u^alpha$, $y= v^beta$, $p = (alpha+beta)/alpha$, and $q = (alpha + beta)/beta$ gives us the desired inequality.
add a comment |
Another cool proof is using Legendre's transform, with $L(x) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p$ is convex, then
$$ L^*(y) = sup_{xin mathbb{R}} Big(xcdot y - L(y)Big) = frac{1}{q}|y|^q.$$
Therefore
$$ L(x)+L^*(y) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p + frac{1}{q}|y|^q geq xcdot{y}.$$
More on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_transformation. It is also called "Fenchel's inequality".
add a comment |
Hint
Let $$f(t)=frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q}-t text{ on } [0,infty)$$
Now show that $t=1$ is a critical point and $f$ is an increasing function for $t geq 1$. This will imply
$$f(t) geq f(1)=0.$$
Consequently,
$$frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q} geq t$$
Now let $t=xy^{frac{1}{p-1}}$.
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053388%2fhow-do-i-show-this-xy-leq-frac1pxp-frac1qyq-without-using-concavi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Method 1:
For non-negative $u,v$ let $f(u)=u^{p-1}$ and $g(v)=v^{q-1}.$ Since $(p-1)(q-1)=1,$ the graphs of $(u,f(u))$ and of $(g(v),v)$ are the same graph, which I will call $G.$
Now $x^p/p=int_0^xf(u)du$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)]$ and the $u$-axis in the $(u,v)$-plane. And $y^q/q=int_0^yg(y)dy$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and $[0, g(y)]times {y}$ and the $v$-axis.
If $x^p=y^q,$ the union of these two figures is the rectangle $R(x,y)$ with corners $(0,0),(0,y),(x,y),(x,0),$ which has area $xy,$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yg(v)dv=xy.$
If $x>y^{q/p}$ then the union of these two figures is $R(x,y)$ plus a region bounded by $G$, the $u$-axis, and the segments ${y^{q/p}}times [0,y]$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)],$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{y^{q/p}}^x f(u)du>xy$.
Similarly if $x<y^{p/q}$ then $y>x^{q/p}$ and $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{x^{q/p}}^y g(v)dv>xy.$
This is easy to see on a diagram.
Generally, if $f:[0,infty)to [0,infty)$ is continuous and strictly monotonic, and $f(0)=0,$ then $xyleq int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yf^{-1}(v)dv.$
Method 2:
For non-negative $x,y$ let $H(x,y)=x^p/p+y^q/q-xy.$ Then $frac {partial H(x,y)}{partial x}=frac1px^{p-1}-y,$ which is negative if $0leq x^{p-1}<y$ and positive if $x^{p-1}>y.$ So for a fixed $y,$ the function $H(x,y)$ has its minimum when $x^{p-1}=y.$ And we have $H(x, x^{p-1})=0.$
add a comment |
Method 1:
For non-negative $u,v$ let $f(u)=u^{p-1}$ and $g(v)=v^{q-1}.$ Since $(p-1)(q-1)=1,$ the graphs of $(u,f(u))$ and of $(g(v),v)$ are the same graph, which I will call $G.$
Now $x^p/p=int_0^xf(u)du$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)]$ and the $u$-axis in the $(u,v)$-plane. And $y^q/q=int_0^yg(y)dy$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and $[0, g(y)]times {y}$ and the $v$-axis.
If $x^p=y^q,$ the union of these two figures is the rectangle $R(x,y)$ with corners $(0,0),(0,y),(x,y),(x,0),$ which has area $xy,$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yg(v)dv=xy.$
If $x>y^{q/p}$ then the union of these two figures is $R(x,y)$ plus a region bounded by $G$, the $u$-axis, and the segments ${y^{q/p}}times [0,y]$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)],$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{y^{q/p}}^x f(u)du>xy$.
Similarly if $x<y^{p/q}$ then $y>x^{q/p}$ and $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{x^{q/p}}^y g(v)dv>xy.$
This is easy to see on a diagram.
Generally, if $f:[0,infty)to [0,infty)$ is continuous and strictly monotonic, and $f(0)=0,$ then $xyleq int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yf^{-1}(v)dv.$
Method 2:
For non-negative $x,y$ let $H(x,y)=x^p/p+y^q/q-xy.$ Then $frac {partial H(x,y)}{partial x}=frac1px^{p-1}-y,$ which is negative if $0leq x^{p-1}<y$ and positive if $x^{p-1}>y.$ So for a fixed $y,$ the function $H(x,y)$ has its minimum when $x^{p-1}=y.$ And we have $H(x, x^{p-1})=0.$
add a comment |
Method 1:
For non-negative $u,v$ let $f(u)=u^{p-1}$ and $g(v)=v^{q-1}.$ Since $(p-1)(q-1)=1,$ the graphs of $(u,f(u))$ and of $(g(v),v)$ are the same graph, which I will call $G.$
Now $x^p/p=int_0^xf(u)du$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)]$ and the $u$-axis in the $(u,v)$-plane. And $y^q/q=int_0^yg(y)dy$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and $[0, g(y)]times {y}$ and the $v$-axis.
If $x^p=y^q,$ the union of these two figures is the rectangle $R(x,y)$ with corners $(0,0),(0,y),(x,y),(x,0),$ which has area $xy,$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yg(v)dv=xy.$
If $x>y^{q/p}$ then the union of these two figures is $R(x,y)$ plus a region bounded by $G$, the $u$-axis, and the segments ${y^{q/p}}times [0,y]$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)],$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{y^{q/p}}^x f(u)du>xy$.
Similarly if $x<y^{p/q}$ then $y>x^{q/p}$ and $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{x^{q/p}}^y g(v)dv>xy.$
This is easy to see on a diagram.
Generally, if $f:[0,infty)to [0,infty)$ is continuous and strictly monotonic, and $f(0)=0,$ then $xyleq int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yf^{-1}(v)dv.$
Method 2:
For non-negative $x,y$ let $H(x,y)=x^p/p+y^q/q-xy.$ Then $frac {partial H(x,y)}{partial x}=frac1px^{p-1}-y,$ which is negative if $0leq x^{p-1}<y$ and positive if $x^{p-1}>y.$ So for a fixed $y,$ the function $H(x,y)$ has its minimum when $x^{p-1}=y.$ And we have $H(x, x^{p-1})=0.$
Method 1:
For non-negative $u,v$ let $f(u)=u^{p-1}$ and $g(v)=v^{q-1}.$ Since $(p-1)(q-1)=1,$ the graphs of $(u,f(u))$ and of $(g(v),v)$ are the same graph, which I will call $G.$
Now $x^p/p=int_0^xf(u)du$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)]$ and the $u$-axis in the $(u,v)$-plane. And $y^q/q=int_0^yg(y)dy$ is the area of the figure bounded by $G$ and $[0, g(y)]times {y}$ and the $v$-axis.
If $x^p=y^q,$ the union of these two figures is the rectangle $R(x,y)$ with corners $(0,0),(0,y),(x,y),(x,0),$ which has area $xy,$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yg(v)dv=xy.$
If $x>y^{q/p}$ then the union of these two figures is $R(x,y)$ plus a region bounded by $G$, the $u$-axis, and the segments ${y^{q/p}}times [0,y]$ and ${x}times [0,f(x)],$ so $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{y^{q/p}}^x f(u)du>xy$.
Similarly if $x<y^{p/q}$ then $y>x^{q/p}$ and $x^p/p+y^q/q=xy+int_{x^{q/p}}^y g(v)dv>xy.$
This is easy to see on a diagram.
Generally, if $f:[0,infty)to [0,infty)$ is continuous and strictly monotonic, and $f(0)=0,$ then $xyleq int_0^xf(u)du+int_0^yf^{-1}(v)dv.$
Method 2:
For non-negative $x,y$ let $H(x,y)=x^p/p+y^q/q-xy.$ Then $frac {partial H(x,y)}{partial x}=frac1px^{p-1}-y,$ which is negative if $0leq x^{p-1}<y$ and positive if $x^{p-1}>y.$ So for a fixed $y,$ the function $H(x,y)$ has its minimum when $x^{p-1}=y.$ And we have $H(x, x^{p-1})=0.$
edited Dec 27 '18 at 10:25
zeraoulia rafik
2,38411029
2,38411029
answered Dec 27 '18 at 9:51
DanielWainfleet
34.1k31647
34.1k31647
add a comment |
add a comment |
This proof is from Steele's Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. The weighted AM-GM inequality gives us
begin{align*}
u^alpha v^beta le frac{alpha}{alpha + beta}u^{alpha + beta} + frac{beta}{alpha + beta}v^{alpha + beta}
end{align*}
for $u, v ge 0$ and $alpha, beta > 0$. Substituting $x = u^alpha$, $y= v^beta$, $p = (alpha+beta)/alpha$, and $q = (alpha + beta)/beta$ gives us the desired inequality.
add a comment |
This proof is from Steele's Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. The weighted AM-GM inequality gives us
begin{align*}
u^alpha v^beta le frac{alpha}{alpha + beta}u^{alpha + beta} + frac{beta}{alpha + beta}v^{alpha + beta}
end{align*}
for $u, v ge 0$ and $alpha, beta > 0$. Substituting $x = u^alpha$, $y= v^beta$, $p = (alpha+beta)/alpha$, and $q = (alpha + beta)/beta$ gives us the desired inequality.
add a comment |
This proof is from Steele's Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. The weighted AM-GM inequality gives us
begin{align*}
u^alpha v^beta le frac{alpha}{alpha + beta}u^{alpha + beta} + frac{beta}{alpha + beta}v^{alpha + beta}
end{align*}
for $u, v ge 0$ and $alpha, beta > 0$. Substituting $x = u^alpha$, $y= v^beta$, $p = (alpha+beta)/alpha$, and $q = (alpha + beta)/beta$ gives us the desired inequality.
This proof is from Steele's Cauchy-Schwarz Master Class. The weighted AM-GM inequality gives us
begin{align*}
u^alpha v^beta le frac{alpha}{alpha + beta}u^{alpha + beta} + frac{beta}{alpha + beta}v^{alpha + beta}
end{align*}
for $u, v ge 0$ and $alpha, beta > 0$. Substituting $x = u^alpha$, $y= v^beta$, $p = (alpha+beta)/alpha$, and $q = (alpha + beta)/beta$ gives us the desired inequality.
answered Dec 26 '18 at 22:47
Tom Chen
508212
508212
add a comment |
add a comment |
Another cool proof is using Legendre's transform, with $L(x) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p$ is convex, then
$$ L^*(y) = sup_{xin mathbb{R}} Big(xcdot y - L(y)Big) = frac{1}{q}|y|^q.$$
Therefore
$$ L(x)+L^*(y) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p + frac{1}{q}|y|^q geq xcdot{y}.$$
More on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_transformation. It is also called "Fenchel's inequality".
add a comment |
Another cool proof is using Legendre's transform, with $L(x) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p$ is convex, then
$$ L^*(y) = sup_{xin mathbb{R}} Big(xcdot y - L(y)Big) = frac{1}{q}|y|^q.$$
Therefore
$$ L(x)+L^*(y) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p + frac{1}{q}|y|^q geq xcdot{y}.$$
More on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_transformation. It is also called "Fenchel's inequality".
add a comment |
Another cool proof is using Legendre's transform, with $L(x) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p$ is convex, then
$$ L^*(y) = sup_{xin mathbb{R}} Big(xcdot y - L(y)Big) = frac{1}{q}|y|^q.$$
Therefore
$$ L(x)+L^*(y) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p + frac{1}{q}|y|^q geq xcdot{y}.$$
More on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_transformation. It is also called "Fenchel's inequality".
Another cool proof is using Legendre's transform, with $L(x) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p$ is convex, then
$$ L^*(y) = sup_{xin mathbb{R}} Big(xcdot y - L(y)Big) = frac{1}{q}|y|^q.$$
Therefore
$$ L(x)+L^*(y) = frac{1}{p}|x|^p + frac{1}{q}|y|^q geq xcdot{y}.$$
More on this, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legendre_transformation. It is also called "Fenchel's inequality".
edited Dec 27 '18 at 7:37
answered Dec 27 '18 at 7:31
Sean
527513
527513
add a comment |
add a comment |
Hint
Let $$f(t)=frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q}-t text{ on } [0,infty)$$
Now show that $t=1$ is a critical point and $f$ is an increasing function for $t geq 1$. This will imply
$$f(t) geq f(1)=0.$$
Consequently,
$$frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q} geq t$$
Now let $t=xy^{frac{1}{p-1}}$.
add a comment |
Hint
Let $$f(t)=frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q}-t text{ on } [0,infty)$$
Now show that $t=1$ is a critical point and $f$ is an increasing function for $t geq 1$. This will imply
$$f(t) geq f(1)=0.$$
Consequently,
$$frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q} geq t$$
Now let $t=xy^{frac{1}{p-1}}$.
add a comment |
Hint
Let $$f(t)=frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q}-t text{ on } [0,infty)$$
Now show that $t=1$ is a critical point and $f$ is an increasing function for $t geq 1$. This will imply
$$f(t) geq f(1)=0.$$
Consequently,
$$frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q} geq t$$
Now let $t=xy^{frac{1}{p-1}}$.
Hint
Let $$f(t)=frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q}-t text{ on } [0,infty)$$
Now show that $t=1$ is a critical point and $f$ is an increasing function for $t geq 1$. This will imply
$$f(t) geq f(1)=0.$$
Consequently,
$$frac{t^p}{p}+frac{1}{q} geq t$$
Now let $t=xy^{frac{1}{p-1}}$.
edited Dec 27 '18 at 20:45
answered Dec 26 '18 at 22:46
Anurag A
25.6k12249
25.6k12249
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053388%2fhow-do-i-show-this-xy-leq-frac1pxp-frac1qyq-without-using-concavi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Check proof 2 here: proofwiki.org/wiki/Young%27s_Inequality_for_Products
– John11
Dec 26 '18 at 22:49
Just to continue John11's comments, like this one
– rtybase
Dec 26 '18 at 23:56
Can you go between $(1-t)x+ty$ and $x/p+y/q$? It's pretty trivial, but usually needs to be pointed out in some minor capacity to be thought of.
– Robert Wolfe
Dec 27 '18 at 0:42