Can we have distinct positive real $x,y,z \neq 1$ with $$ x^{\left( y^z \right)} = y^{\left( z^x \right)} = z^{\left( x^y \right)} $$ in cyclic permutation?

It does not work well if any variable is 1. Also, it obviously works if all three are equal. I think if two are equal, probably the third must match as well. If there is anything else, one would expect a curve of some sort..I guess from what I am asking, one might as well demand $x < y < z.$ NO, not the same as $x < z < y$ as not cyclically equivalent, so maybe drop that.

Suggested by what is the largest number here?

  • 27
    $\begingroup$ Nice descriptive title. $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Sep 14 '13 at 20:11
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I laughed in real life. $\endgroup$ – Git Gud Sep 14 '13 at 20:16
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ @GitGud, good. I do try to add a little humor...also it is quite true $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Sep 14 '13 at 20:17
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think, mucinex is an answer. $\endgroup$ – Moishe Kohan Sep 14 '13 at 20:23
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Looks like a kind of last fermat jagy theorem showing up^^ $\endgroup$ – GarouDan Sep 17 '13 at 23:05

I think I've solved it, but I just don't trust myelf. So please hop on and correct me if I've done something stupid..

By way of contradiction, let's assume the equality $x^{(y^z)}=y^{(z^x)}=z^{(x^y)}$ holds. Now define the function $f(y,z)= x^{(y^z)}- y^{(z^x)}$. On one hand, $f(y,z)$ is identically zero, so all its first partials vanish. On the other hand, we may compute them formally as $$f_y=\frac{x^{(y^z)}zy^z\ln{x} -y^{(z^x)}z^x}{y}\quad \mbox{and} \quad f_z=\ln{y}\left(x^{(y^z)}y^z\ln{x}-y^{(z^x)}xz^{x-1}\right)$$ Setting each of these to zero, and using the fact that $x^{(y^z)}=y^{(z^x)}$, we obtain $$zy^z\ln{x}=z^x\quad \mbox{and} \quad y^z\ln{x}=xz^{x-1}$$ From here it is fairly trivial to show that either $z=0$ or $x=1$, but each of these possibilities is ruled out by hypothesis.

Note that in the proof, I only used the asumption that $x^{(y^z)}= y^{(z^x)}$.

  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. I'll take a careful look in a few hours. $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Oct 2 '13 at 23:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I would say instead that $h(x,y,z) = x^{\left( y^z \right)} - y^{\left( z^x \right)}$ is $0$ along the line $x=y=z,$ meaning that its gradient, if defined, is orthogonal to the vector $(1,1,1)$ along that line. My suspicion is that the $0$ level surface of $h$ is a wiggly variant of a helicoid en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helicoid wrapping around that line, so are the other two pairwise equality surfaces, and the three meet only along that line. perhaps offset by $120^\circ$ rotations. $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Oct 3 '13 at 2:49
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Sounds plausable, Will. I tried to think of the problem geometrically as well but soon relaized that the level surfaces were a bit too exotic for me to wrap my head around. Recreational math should not make the brain hurt :-) $\endgroup$ – Doc Oct 3 '13 at 3:35
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ What's the domain of $f$? In particular, why does it follow that it's identically $0$ from the assumption that you have a single $(x,y,z)$ off of the line $x=y=z$ for which $f(y,z)= 0$? $\endgroup$ – Jason DeVito Oct 3 '13 at 18:14
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Jason, You're right, I cannot make that assumption. My "proof" is not a proof. Back to the drawing board. $\endgroup$ – Doc Oct 4 '13 at 13:04

It is an interesting problem. I think that it gave you your cold. I hope by now you are fully recovered.

I believe it never happens.

First, we can establish the result over the integers. Supposing this double equality ever occurs, consider a minimal example. Then any prime divisor $p$ of $x$ must divide both $y$ and $z$. It means that $p^{(p^p)}$ divides each of $x^{(y^z)}$, $y^{(z^x)}$, and $z^{(x^y)}$. Division of all terms by $p^{(p^p)}$ now gives a smaller example, so a contradiction.

Moving to the rational numbers is now easy ... just a matter of clearing out the denominators and repeating the same basic argument.

To get the result over the reals is a bit more subtle, and I haven't worked it out entirely yet. I'm thinking that a necessary first step is to realize each of $x$, $y$ and $z$ as the limit of a sequence of rational numbers. You can try this yourself, as I'll be preoccupied for the next three days.

Best of luck with this interesting problem. I will return to it when I get back to my home base.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does dividing through by $p^{p^p}$ work? In particular, it isn't the case that $x^{y^z}/p^{p^p}=x/p^{y/p^{z/p}}$. $\endgroup$ – Oscar Cunningham Sep 26 '13 at 16:21
  • $\begingroup$ It might be easier to look at if you take logs twice, and you get $z\ln y+\ln\ln x = x\ln z+\ln\ln y = y\ln x+\ln\ln z$ $\endgroup$ – Empy2 Sep 26 '13 at 16:45
  • $\begingroup$ To first order, if $x=p+a,y=p+b,z=p+c$, and $a,b,c$ are small compared to $p$, I think you need $c\ln p+b+a/(p\ln p)$ to equal its cyclic permutations. Form a 3x3 matrix, multiply its inverse by the vector $(1,1,1)$ $\endgroup$ – Empy2 Sep 26 '13 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ hm, you get a multiple of $(1,1,1)$. Unless the determinant is zero. Can you solve $(\ln p)^3+1+1/(p\ln p)^3 = 3/p$? $\endgroup$ – Empy2 Sep 26 '13 at 17:08
  • $\begingroup$ Doc, I hope this works out. I got nowhere. $\endgroup$ – Will Jagy Sep 26 '13 at 17:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.