From: Ken Pledger on
In article <4b4f92fd(a)news.x-privat.org>, "Amy" <nospam(a)spamless.com>
wrote:

> "KY" <wkfkh056(a)yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
> news:1082409701.70238.1263485757008.JavaMail.root(a)gallium.mathforum.org...
> > Eliminate a, b, c;
> > a + b + c = 0,
> > ((b - c)/a + (c - a)/b + (a - b)/c)*(a/(b - c) + b/(c - a) + c/(a - b)) =
> > k
>
> 2 equations, 4 unknowns....................



Well, eliminating a, b, c still allows k to stay; but that would
usually require 4 equations as you suggest. However, these two
equations are cunningly contrived to lead to the conclusion k = 9. Can
you work out how?

Ken Pledger.
From: preedmont on

"Ken Pledger" <ken.pledger(a)mcs.vuw.ac.nz> wrote in message
news:ken.pledger-748EF1.11584115012010(a)nothing.attdns.com...
> In article <4b4f92fd(a)news.x-privat.org>, "Amy" <nospam(a)spamless.com>
> wrote:
>
>> "KY" <wkfkh056(a)yahoo.co.jp> wrote in message
>> news:1082409701.70238.1263485757008.JavaMail.root(a)gallium.mathforum.org...
>> > Eliminate a, b, c;
>> > a + b + c = 0,
>> > ((b - c)/a + (c - a)/b + (a - b)/c)*(a/(b - c) + b/(c - a) + c/(a - b))
>> > =
>> > k
>>
>> 2 equations, 4 unknowns....................
>
>
>
> Well, eliminating a, b, c still allows k to stay; but that would
> usually require 4 equations as you suggest. However, these two
> equations are cunningly contrived to lead to the conclusion k = 9. Can
> you work out how?
>
> Ken Pledger.

ez to work out, may take a page, lot of 2nd order terms,