rule
rule
17 comments
-
1, 1 and 7. The sum is 3.75 – take it or leave it.
-
Good enough for engineers.
-
Electronic engineers will know that 1, 1, 8 is closer but will go for 1, 1, 6.8 because they are in the E6 series and that will save 0.1 cents per device.
-
-
-
This person has found an actual solution:
https://mlzeng.com/an-interesting-equation.html
x = 36875131794129999827197811565225474825492979968971970996283137471637224634055579
y = 154476802108746166441951315019919837485664325669565431700026634898253202035277999
z = 4373612677928697257861252602371390152816537558161613618621437993378423467772036
This is apparently the smallest solution.
The derivation of the solution itself requires an understanding of Diophantine equations and elliptical curves, which I will not pretend to understand well enough to summarize.
-
From the same article, this is a solution when negative integers are allowed:
{{x -> 11, y -> 9, z -> -5}}
-
-
no, no I can't
-
🍎=376556443707
🍌=50000000000
🍍=50000000000
-
Now do it for a case where a,b, and c are pair wise not equal.
-
I have to admit, my solution is not correct anyways. I simply found a "solution" for which the margin of error is smaller than the calculator's level of precision.
Sorry everyone, I cheated.
-
-
-
The solutions don't quite fancy me as positive whole values, see for yourself.
-
An integer solution does exist.
-
17 comments