Detailed derivation of the factorization and application of a^3 + b^3 + c^3 - 3abc = (a + b + c)(a² + b² + c² - ab - bc - ca)
8 min readStrong Foundation Mathematics · High School Math LeagueDownload Markdown
Common conclusions
We start from an ordinary three-dimensional cubic symmetry: a3+b3+c3−3abc=(a+b+c)(a2+b2+c2−ab−bc−ca)=21(a+b+c)[(a−b)2+(b−c)2+(c−a)2] In fact, there is a more magical proof method:
Let a,b,c be the three roots of the cubic equation x3−(a+b+c)x2+(ab+bc+ca)x−abc=0.
This proof method is completely consistent with Newton's Identity (dig a hole and write about it later).
In short, if a,b,c∈R,a3+b3+c3−3abc=0 (※), if and only if a+b+c=0 or a=b=c.
On the contrary, if a+b+c=0, then a3+b3+c3=3abc.
Then we can easily know, a,b,c∈R+,a3+b3+c3−3abc≥0
Digging a hole here, I will explain it again later using the General method for cubic inequalities in three variables in Teacher Ye Jun's book.
Practical application
In fact, (※) appears frequently in the strong foundation examinations of various colleges and universities:
Example 1
(2020 Tsinghua Strong Foundation) It is known that the real number a,b satisfies a3+b3+3ab=1, then the set of all possible values of a+b is M, then ()
A. M is a single-element set B. M is a finite set, but not a single-element set
C. M is an infinite set and has a lower bound D. M is an infinite set and has no lower bound
Obviously a3+b3+(−1)3−3ab(−1)=0 can only have a=b=−1 or a+b+(−1)=0, so:
M={−1,2}, choose B
Example 2
(2014 Peking University Comprehensive Camp) Suppose the real number a,b,c satisfies a+b+c=0,a3+b3+c3=0, among which n∈N+, find the value of a2n+1+b2n+1+c2n+1
abc=0, let’s assume c=0,a+b=0, then the equation is obviously equal to 0.
Example 3
(Self-recruited by Peking University in 2016) It is known that for the real number a, there is a real number b,c that satisfies a3−b3−c3=3abc,a2=2(b+c), then the number of such real numbers a is ()
A.1 B.3 C. Infinite D. None of the first three options are correct
Since ※There is a−b−c=0 or a=−b=−c, the two situations are classified and discussed below:
Case 1: a=b+c
a2=2a, then a can be 0 or 2
Case 2: b=c=-a
a2=−4a≥0, then a=−4
To sum up, choose B
Example 4
(2019 Tsinghua University Leader) Suppose the real number x,y satisfies x3+27y3+9xy=1, then ()
A. The maximum value of x3y is 31 B. The maximum value of x3y is 6427
C. The minimum value of x3y is −33 D. There is no minimum value for x3y
x3+(3y)3+(−1)3−3x(3y)(−1)=0, launched x+3y−1=0 or x=3y=−1
Case 1: x=3y=-1
x=−1,y=−31,x3y=31
Case 2:x+3y=1
x3(3y)=x3(1−x), obviously there is no minimum value.
Suppose the maximum value is greater than 0, then x,(1−x) has the same sign as x∈(0,1).
9x3y=3x3(3y)=x3(3−3x)≤(43)4x3y≤2569<31 To sum up, choose AD.
Example 5
(2021 Peking University Winter Vacation Class) Suppose the positive integer m,n satisfies m3+n3+99mn=333, then the number pair (m, n) has () group. m3+n3+(−33)3−3mn(−33)=0
Case 1: m=n=-33
Contradictory to the condition for positive integers
Case 2: m+n=33
(m,n)∣m,n∈N+,m+n=33=(1,32),(2,31),...,(32,1), 32 groups in total.
If you are used to seeing questions with (※) as a condition, let's make "The offensive and defensive momentum easy".
Example 6
(Zhihu contributor) Let a,b,c be nonnegative real numbers with a+b+c=1. Prove that a3+b3+c3+3abc≥92. a3+b3+c3+3abc=6abc+(a+b+c)(a+b+c)(a2+b2+c2−ab−bc−ca)=6abc+a2+b2+c2−(ab+bc+ca) You cannot scale (a+b+c)(a2+b2+c2−ab−bc−ca) to 0 here, otherwise it will be excessive scaling.
abc is on the larger side of the inequality sign, and the original formula is symmetric about a,b,c, we consider using the SPQ method + Schur's inequality.
Suppose s=a+b+c,q=ab+bc+ca,p=abc, then Schur:s3−4sq+9p≥0,9p≥4q−16abc+a2+b2+c2−(ab+bc+ca)=6p+s2−3q=6p−3q+1≥−31(q−1)≥92 This is equivalent to q≤31, given by the AM-GM inequality 3q≤s3=1, Q.E.D.
Example 7
(U.S. Mathematics Competition) Prove: For any three prime numbers that are not equal to each other, their cube root cannot be one of the three terms of the arithmetic sequence.
Proof by contradiction: Suppose the three prime numbers are p1<p2<p3 and assume k3p2−3p1=l3p3−3p2,k,l∈N∗, then: l3p1−(k+l)3p2+k3p3=0(l3p1)3+(k3p3)3+[−(k+l)(3p2)]3=l3p1+k3p3−(k+l)3p2=−3lk(k+l)(3p1)(3p2)(3p3) The left hand side is an integer, so 3p1p2p3 must be a rational number (note the coefficient on the right 3lk(k+l)=0).
But 3p1p2p3 is an irrational number: if 3p1p2p3=rq (gcd(q,r)=1), then r3p1p2p3=q3. From this, p1∣q3, because p1 is a prime number, so p1∣q, suppose q=p1q′, and substitute it to get r3p2p3=p12q′3, so p1∣r3, and then p1∣r, contradicts gcd(q,r)=1.
Q.E.D
Example 8
If abc=0,a+b+c=0, find a(b1+c1)+b(c1+a1)+c(a1+b1).
Original formula= abca2(b+c)+b2(c+a)+c2(a+b)=−abca3+b3+c3=−3
Cubic equation of one variable
Here we introduce a proof of Cardan’s formula for the cubic equation of one variable: For ax3+bx2+cx+d=0(a=0), it can always be transformed into: u3+pu+q=0 Let u+v+w=0: u3+v3+w3−3uvw=0{v3+w3=q,vw=−31p This is equivalent to: {v3+w3=q,v3w3=−271p3 That is, v3,w3 is the two roots of the quadratic equation t2−qt−271p3=0.
Discriminant Δ=q2+274p3
Considering the symmetry of v,w, we might as well let: Δ≥0{v3=2q+Δ,w3=2q−ΔΔ<0{v3=2q+−Δi,w3=2q−−Δi For the convenience of writing, we will not distinguish between −Δ and Δi below.
Constrained by De Moivre's formula and vw=−31p: ⎩⎨⎧v=32q+Δ,w=32q−Δ⎩⎨⎧v=32q+Δw,w=32q−Δw−1⎩⎨⎧v=32q+Δw2,w=32q−Δw−2u=−(v+w), so three roots are solved.
According to the symbol of Δ=q2+274p3, the root situation can be judged:
⎩⎨⎧Δ=0 and pq=0:Δ>0:Δ<0:pq=0:one double real root and one simple real rootone real root and one complex-conjugate pairthree distinct real rootsone triple real root
Δ<0: The case of three real roots ("irreducible case")
Intuitive confusion
When Δ<0, Δ is an imaginary number, so the cube root of a complex number appears in the expression of v,w- but the end result is three real numbers. This is the famous casus irreducibilis in history, and Cardano himself was confused by it.
Use trigonometric method to understand
When Δ<0, it is more intuitive to change the parameterization. At this time 2q+−Δi is a complex number, written in polar coordinate form:
2q+−Δi=reiθ2q−−Δi=re−iθ
Among them
r=4q2−∣Δ∣=−27p3,θ=arctanq−Δ
(Δ<0 is p<0, so r is a real number.)
uk=−r1/3ei(θ+2kπ)/3+r1/3ei(−θ+2kπ)/3, k=0,1,2, corresponding to three roots:
The three roots are all real numbers because the complex parts exactly cancel when v+w is added.
Why do plural numbers disappear?
The key is that vw=−p/3 is a real constraint. v and w are complex conjugates of each other:
v=r1/3eiθ/3,w=vˉ=r1/3e−iθ/3
So
u=−(v+w)=−2r1/3cos3θ∈R
The other two roots corresponding to θ are replaced by θ+2π and θ+4π, which are also real numbers. **Complex numbers are just the "intermediate language" of calculations, and eventually the imaginary parts cancel out. **
Historical significance
The irreducible case proves something important historically: even if the roots of an equation are all real numbers, sometimes it is unavoidable to pass through complex numbers in the derivation. This is one of the important motivations for complex numbers to be taken seriously by mathematicians.
Conclusion (Gemini)
Through the above derivation and example practice of the classic identity a3+b3+c3−3abc, we can see its core position in dealing with three-dimensional symmetry, relationship between roots of equations, and inequality proof (such as Schur's inequality).
Whether it is the ingenious deformed evaluation in the strong basis plan or the counter-evidence derivation combined with the properties of number theory in the mathematics competition, mastering the two forms of this formula - factorization type and formulation type, is often the key to breaking the game. I hope that the review of this article can help you to "have formulas in your mind and methods to solve problems" when facing such high-order symmetry problems.