xrx +1 >= x + rx
Oh I didn't realise that you were allowed to just move things around and prove. I thought you had to either use LHS - RHS or using the AM/GM inequality
you can move things around and prove, but what I did in the now deleted last step wasn't legit.Oh wait so I can't do what you did?
rx (x-1) >= x-1,so then would i write
rx >= 1
x>=0 which is true since given that x>=0?
I retract my following statement.rx (x-1) >= x-1,
we need to take two cases here, since x-1 might be negative and we would then get
rx<=1
which would still end in x>= 0.
So I guess it is valid haha.
missing the 0<x<1 caseView attachment 35104
my solution
Need to look at cases for when you divide x-1 as said above.this is my solution
x√(x) + 1 >= x + √x
x√x - √x >= x - 1
√x (x-1) >= x-1
√x >= 1
x >= 1
(x-1) >= 0 (for x is real and x>1) and x-1 <= 0 (for x is real and x is between 0 and 1)