If $f(4xy)=2y[f(x+y)+f(x-y)]$ and $f(5)=3$, find $f(2015)$

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP












4















Suppose the function $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$ satisfies the following conditions:



$$beginalign
f(4xy)&=2y[f(x+y)+f(x-y)] \[4pt]
f(5)&=3
endalign$$



Find the value of $f(2015)$.




I have tried to find some other hiding condition, like $f(0)=0,$ but which is useless.










share|cite|improve this question




























    4















    Suppose the function $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$ satisfies the following conditions:



    $$beginalign
    f(4xy)&=2y[f(x+y)+f(x-y)] \[4pt]
    f(5)&=3
    endalign$$



    Find the value of $f(2015)$.




    I have tried to find some other hiding condition, like $f(0)=0,$ but which is useless.










    share|cite|improve this question


























      4












      4








      4


      1






      Suppose the function $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$ satisfies the following conditions:



      $$beginalign
      f(4xy)&=2y[f(x+y)+f(x-y)] \[4pt]
      f(5)&=3
      endalign$$



      Find the value of $f(2015)$.




      I have tried to find some other hiding condition, like $f(0)=0,$ but which is useless.










      share|cite|improve this question
















      Suppose the function $f:Bbb RtoBbb R$ satisfies the following conditions:



      $$beginalign
      f(4xy)&=2y[f(x+y)+f(x-y)] \[4pt]
      f(5)&=3
      endalign$$



      Find the value of $f(2015)$.




      I have tried to find some other hiding condition, like $f(0)=0,$ but which is useless.







      functions






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Dec 31 '18 at 22:27









      Blue

      47.7k870151




      47.7k870151










      asked Dec 27 '18 at 0:20









      yuanming luoyuanming luo

      707




      707




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2














          Firstly, it’s trivial that
          $$f(0) = f(4cdot 0cdot 0) = 2cdot 0 cdot [f(0) + f(0)] = 0$$



          Next, we see that
          $$0 = f(0) = f(4cdot 0 cdot y) = 2ycdot [f(y) + f(-y)]text,$$
          which implies that $f(-y) = -f(y)$ for all $yneq 0$.



          Afterwards, one notices that
          $$f(4xy) = f(4yx)$$
          Hence,
          $$2ycdot [f(x+y) + f(x-y)] = 2xcdot [f(x+y) + f(y-x)]$$
          $$Leftrightarrow (x-y)cdot f(x+y) = (x+y)cdot f(x-y)$$
          $$Leftrightarrow f(x+y) = fracx+yx-ycdot f(x-y)$$



          If we substitute now $x=1010$ and $y=1005$, we get that
          $$f(2015) = frac20155cdot 3 = 1209$$






          share|cite|improve this answer




















          • Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
            – John Omielan
            Jan 1 at 1:22


















          5














          With the provided function,



          $$fleft(4xyright) = 2yleft[fleft(x + yright) + fleft(x - yright)right] tag1labeleq1$$



          First, substitute $y = 0$ to get



          $$fleft(0right) = 0 tag2labeleq2$$



          Next, substitute $x = 0$ and use eqrefeq2 to get



          $$0 = 2yleft[fleft(yright) + fleft(-yright)right] tag3labeleq3$$



          Thus, for all values of $y$ other than $0$, dividing both sides by $2y$ gives



          $$fleft(yright) = -fleft(-yright) tag4labeleq4$$



          In other words, $f$ is an odd function. Next, substituting $y = 1$ into eqrefeq1 gives



          $$fleft(4xright) = 2left[fleft(x + 1right) + fleft(x - 1right)right] tag5labeleq5$$



          Now, using $x = 1$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2left[fleft(2right) + fleft(0right)right] tag6labeleq6$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq2 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2fleft(2right) tag7labeleq7$$



          Similarly, using $x = 3$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 2left[fleft(4right) + fleft(2right)right] tag8labeleq8$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq7 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 6fleft(2right) tag9labeleq9$$



          Note that eqrefeq2, eqrefeq4, eqrefeq7 and eqrefeq9 all satisfy



          $$fleft(nxright) = nfleft(xright) forall ; n in N tag10labeleq10$$



          In particular, for eqrefeq2, $n = 0 ; forall ; x in R$; for eqrefeq4, $n = -1 ; forall ; x in R$; and for eqrefeq7 & eqrefeq9, $x = 2$ only, with $n = 2$ & $n = 6$, respectively. This doesn't prove eqrefeq10 always works, but it suggests that $f$ is a linear multiple of $x$, i.e, $fleft(xright) = kx text for a non-zero constant k in R$, which from the given condition of



          $$fleft(5right) = 3 tag11labeleq11$$



          gives a value of $k = frac35$ so the function would be



          $$fleft(xright) = cfrac3x5 tag12labeleq12$$



          To confirm this, substitute eqrefeq12 into eqrefeq5 to give on the left side



          $$cfrac12x5 tag13labeleq13$$



          with the right side becoming



          $$2left[cfrac3left(x + 1right)5 + cfrac3left(x - 1right)5 right] = 2left[cfracleft(3x + 3 + 3x - 3right)5 right] = cfrac12x5 tag14labeleq14$$



          Similarly, using eqrefeq12 in eqrefeq1 gives a left & right hand side of $frac12xy5$, confirming it's also a solution of the original equation. I'm not quite sure offhand how to prove it's unique, but I assume it is. We thus get a final answer of



          $$fleft(2015right) = cfrac3 times 20155 = 1209 tag15labeleq15$$



          Note: The solution could involve just "guessing" the function being a constant multiple of the argument, and then showing this works to determine the final answer, but I thought it might be useful for people to see how one can approach solving this problem somewhat systematically as I did. In particular, I tried using small constant values for $x$ and $y$, checking what information this offered, and then seeing if I could leverage this when using other values. For example, I started with $x = 0$ and $y = 0$, then used $y = 1$, $x = 1$ and $x = 3$. Each time, I used previous details to help simplify and learn more about the new values, until I saw the pattern which I then confirmed worked.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:08






          • 1




            @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:17











          • Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 3:14











          • I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:38










          • @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:55











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053456%2fif-f4xy-2yfxyfx-y-and-f5-3-find-f2015%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          2














          Firstly, it’s trivial that
          $$f(0) = f(4cdot 0cdot 0) = 2cdot 0 cdot [f(0) + f(0)] = 0$$



          Next, we see that
          $$0 = f(0) = f(4cdot 0 cdot y) = 2ycdot [f(y) + f(-y)]text,$$
          which implies that $f(-y) = -f(y)$ for all $yneq 0$.



          Afterwards, one notices that
          $$f(4xy) = f(4yx)$$
          Hence,
          $$2ycdot [f(x+y) + f(x-y)] = 2xcdot [f(x+y) + f(y-x)]$$
          $$Leftrightarrow (x-y)cdot f(x+y) = (x+y)cdot f(x-y)$$
          $$Leftrightarrow f(x+y) = fracx+yx-ycdot f(x-y)$$



          If we substitute now $x=1010$ and $y=1005$, we get that
          $$f(2015) = frac20155cdot 3 = 1209$$






          share|cite|improve this answer




















          • Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
            – John Omielan
            Jan 1 at 1:22















          2














          Firstly, it’s trivial that
          $$f(0) = f(4cdot 0cdot 0) = 2cdot 0 cdot [f(0) + f(0)] = 0$$



          Next, we see that
          $$0 = f(0) = f(4cdot 0 cdot y) = 2ycdot [f(y) + f(-y)]text,$$
          which implies that $f(-y) = -f(y)$ for all $yneq 0$.



          Afterwards, one notices that
          $$f(4xy) = f(4yx)$$
          Hence,
          $$2ycdot [f(x+y) + f(x-y)] = 2xcdot [f(x+y) + f(y-x)]$$
          $$Leftrightarrow (x-y)cdot f(x+y) = (x+y)cdot f(x-y)$$
          $$Leftrightarrow f(x+y) = fracx+yx-ycdot f(x-y)$$



          If we substitute now $x=1010$ and $y=1005$, we get that
          $$f(2015) = frac20155cdot 3 = 1209$$






          share|cite|improve this answer




















          • Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
            – John Omielan
            Jan 1 at 1:22













          2












          2








          2






          Firstly, it’s trivial that
          $$f(0) = f(4cdot 0cdot 0) = 2cdot 0 cdot [f(0) + f(0)] = 0$$



          Next, we see that
          $$0 = f(0) = f(4cdot 0 cdot y) = 2ycdot [f(y) + f(-y)]text,$$
          which implies that $f(-y) = -f(y)$ for all $yneq 0$.



          Afterwards, one notices that
          $$f(4xy) = f(4yx)$$
          Hence,
          $$2ycdot [f(x+y) + f(x-y)] = 2xcdot [f(x+y) + f(y-x)]$$
          $$Leftrightarrow (x-y)cdot f(x+y) = (x+y)cdot f(x-y)$$
          $$Leftrightarrow f(x+y) = fracx+yx-ycdot f(x-y)$$



          If we substitute now $x=1010$ and $y=1005$, we get that
          $$f(2015) = frac20155cdot 3 = 1209$$






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Firstly, it’s trivial that
          $$f(0) = f(4cdot 0cdot 0) = 2cdot 0 cdot [f(0) + f(0)] = 0$$



          Next, we see that
          $$0 = f(0) = f(4cdot 0 cdot y) = 2ycdot [f(y) + f(-y)]text,$$
          which implies that $f(-y) = -f(y)$ for all $yneq 0$.



          Afterwards, one notices that
          $$f(4xy) = f(4yx)$$
          Hence,
          $$2ycdot [f(x+y) + f(x-y)] = 2xcdot [f(x+y) + f(y-x)]$$
          $$Leftrightarrow (x-y)cdot f(x+y) = (x+y)cdot f(x-y)$$
          $$Leftrightarrow f(x+y) = fracx+yx-ycdot f(x-y)$$



          If we substitute now $x=1010$ and $y=1005$, we get that
          $$f(2015) = frac20155cdot 3 = 1209$$







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Dec 31 '18 at 23:59









          Jonas De SchouwerJonas De Schouwer

          1284




          1284











          • Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
            – John Omielan
            Jan 1 at 1:22
















          • Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
            – John Omielan
            Jan 1 at 1:22















          Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
          – John Omielan
          Jan 1 at 1:22




          Very nice! It's a more direct way to get the function value than what I did in my answer.
          – John Omielan
          Jan 1 at 1:22











          5














          With the provided function,



          $$fleft(4xyright) = 2yleft[fleft(x + yright) + fleft(x - yright)right] tag1labeleq1$$



          First, substitute $y = 0$ to get



          $$fleft(0right) = 0 tag2labeleq2$$



          Next, substitute $x = 0$ and use eqrefeq2 to get



          $$0 = 2yleft[fleft(yright) + fleft(-yright)right] tag3labeleq3$$



          Thus, for all values of $y$ other than $0$, dividing both sides by $2y$ gives



          $$fleft(yright) = -fleft(-yright) tag4labeleq4$$



          In other words, $f$ is an odd function. Next, substituting $y = 1$ into eqrefeq1 gives



          $$fleft(4xright) = 2left[fleft(x + 1right) + fleft(x - 1right)right] tag5labeleq5$$



          Now, using $x = 1$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2left[fleft(2right) + fleft(0right)right] tag6labeleq6$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq2 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2fleft(2right) tag7labeleq7$$



          Similarly, using $x = 3$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 2left[fleft(4right) + fleft(2right)right] tag8labeleq8$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq7 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 6fleft(2right) tag9labeleq9$$



          Note that eqrefeq2, eqrefeq4, eqrefeq7 and eqrefeq9 all satisfy



          $$fleft(nxright) = nfleft(xright) forall ; n in N tag10labeleq10$$



          In particular, for eqrefeq2, $n = 0 ; forall ; x in R$; for eqrefeq4, $n = -1 ; forall ; x in R$; and for eqrefeq7 & eqrefeq9, $x = 2$ only, with $n = 2$ & $n = 6$, respectively. This doesn't prove eqrefeq10 always works, but it suggests that $f$ is a linear multiple of $x$, i.e, $fleft(xright) = kx text for a non-zero constant k in R$, which from the given condition of



          $$fleft(5right) = 3 tag11labeleq11$$



          gives a value of $k = frac35$ so the function would be



          $$fleft(xright) = cfrac3x5 tag12labeleq12$$



          To confirm this, substitute eqrefeq12 into eqrefeq5 to give on the left side



          $$cfrac12x5 tag13labeleq13$$



          with the right side becoming



          $$2left[cfrac3left(x + 1right)5 + cfrac3left(x - 1right)5 right] = 2left[cfracleft(3x + 3 + 3x - 3right)5 right] = cfrac12x5 tag14labeleq14$$



          Similarly, using eqrefeq12 in eqrefeq1 gives a left & right hand side of $frac12xy5$, confirming it's also a solution of the original equation. I'm not quite sure offhand how to prove it's unique, but I assume it is. We thus get a final answer of



          $$fleft(2015right) = cfrac3 times 20155 = 1209 tag15labeleq15$$



          Note: The solution could involve just "guessing" the function being a constant multiple of the argument, and then showing this works to determine the final answer, but I thought it might be useful for people to see how one can approach solving this problem somewhat systematically as I did. In particular, I tried using small constant values for $x$ and $y$, checking what information this offered, and then seeing if I could leverage this when using other values. For example, I started with $x = 0$ and $y = 0$, then used $y = 1$, $x = 1$ and $x = 3$. Each time, I used previous details to help simplify and learn more about the new values, until I saw the pattern which I then confirmed worked.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:08






          • 1




            @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:17











          • Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 3:14











          • I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:38










          • @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:55
















          5














          With the provided function,



          $$fleft(4xyright) = 2yleft[fleft(x + yright) + fleft(x - yright)right] tag1labeleq1$$



          First, substitute $y = 0$ to get



          $$fleft(0right) = 0 tag2labeleq2$$



          Next, substitute $x = 0$ and use eqrefeq2 to get



          $$0 = 2yleft[fleft(yright) + fleft(-yright)right] tag3labeleq3$$



          Thus, for all values of $y$ other than $0$, dividing both sides by $2y$ gives



          $$fleft(yright) = -fleft(-yright) tag4labeleq4$$



          In other words, $f$ is an odd function. Next, substituting $y = 1$ into eqrefeq1 gives



          $$fleft(4xright) = 2left[fleft(x + 1right) + fleft(x - 1right)right] tag5labeleq5$$



          Now, using $x = 1$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2left[fleft(2right) + fleft(0right)right] tag6labeleq6$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq2 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2fleft(2right) tag7labeleq7$$



          Similarly, using $x = 3$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 2left[fleft(4right) + fleft(2right)right] tag8labeleq8$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq7 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 6fleft(2right) tag9labeleq9$$



          Note that eqrefeq2, eqrefeq4, eqrefeq7 and eqrefeq9 all satisfy



          $$fleft(nxright) = nfleft(xright) forall ; n in N tag10labeleq10$$



          In particular, for eqrefeq2, $n = 0 ; forall ; x in R$; for eqrefeq4, $n = -1 ; forall ; x in R$; and for eqrefeq7 & eqrefeq9, $x = 2$ only, with $n = 2$ & $n = 6$, respectively. This doesn't prove eqrefeq10 always works, but it suggests that $f$ is a linear multiple of $x$, i.e, $fleft(xright) = kx text for a non-zero constant k in R$, which from the given condition of



          $$fleft(5right) = 3 tag11labeleq11$$



          gives a value of $k = frac35$ so the function would be



          $$fleft(xright) = cfrac3x5 tag12labeleq12$$



          To confirm this, substitute eqrefeq12 into eqrefeq5 to give on the left side



          $$cfrac12x5 tag13labeleq13$$



          with the right side becoming



          $$2left[cfrac3left(x + 1right)5 + cfrac3left(x - 1right)5 right] = 2left[cfracleft(3x + 3 + 3x - 3right)5 right] = cfrac12x5 tag14labeleq14$$



          Similarly, using eqrefeq12 in eqrefeq1 gives a left & right hand side of $frac12xy5$, confirming it's also a solution of the original equation. I'm not quite sure offhand how to prove it's unique, but I assume it is. We thus get a final answer of



          $$fleft(2015right) = cfrac3 times 20155 = 1209 tag15labeleq15$$



          Note: The solution could involve just "guessing" the function being a constant multiple of the argument, and then showing this works to determine the final answer, but I thought it might be useful for people to see how one can approach solving this problem somewhat systematically as I did. In particular, I tried using small constant values for $x$ and $y$, checking what information this offered, and then seeing if I could leverage this when using other values. For example, I started with $x = 0$ and $y = 0$, then used $y = 1$, $x = 1$ and $x = 3$. Each time, I used previous details to help simplify and learn more about the new values, until I saw the pattern which I then confirmed worked.






          share|cite|improve this answer






















          • I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:08






          • 1




            @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:17











          • Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 3:14











          • I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:38










          • @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:55














          5












          5








          5






          With the provided function,



          $$fleft(4xyright) = 2yleft[fleft(x + yright) + fleft(x - yright)right] tag1labeleq1$$



          First, substitute $y = 0$ to get



          $$fleft(0right) = 0 tag2labeleq2$$



          Next, substitute $x = 0$ and use eqrefeq2 to get



          $$0 = 2yleft[fleft(yright) + fleft(-yright)right] tag3labeleq3$$



          Thus, for all values of $y$ other than $0$, dividing both sides by $2y$ gives



          $$fleft(yright) = -fleft(-yright) tag4labeleq4$$



          In other words, $f$ is an odd function. Next, substituting $y = 1$ into eqrefeq1 gives



          $$fleft(4xright) = 2left[fleft(x + 1right) + fleft(x - 1right)right] tag5labeleq5$$



          Now, using $x = 1$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2left[fleft(2right) + fleft(0right)right] tag6labeleq6$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq2 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2fleft(2right) tag7labeleq7$$



          Similarly, using $x = 3$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 2left[fleft(4right) + fleft(2right)right] tag8labeleq8$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq7 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 6fleft(2right) tag9labeleq9$$



          Note that eqrefeq2, eqrefeq4, eqrefeq7 and eqrefeq9 all satisfy



          $$fleft(nxright) = nfleft(xright) forall ; n in N tag10labeleq10$$



          In particular, for eqrefeq2, $n = 0 ; forall ; x in R$; for eqrefeq4, $n = -1 ; forall ; x in R$; and for eqrefeq7 & eqrefeq9, $x = 2$ only, with $n = 2$ & $n = 6$, respectively. This doesn't prove eqrefeq10 always works, but it suggests that $f$ is a linear multiple of $x$, i.e, $fleft(xright) = kx text for a non-zero constant k in R$, which from the given condition of



          $$fleft(5right) = 3 tag11labeleq11$$



          gives a value of $k = frac35$ so the function would be



          $$fleft(xright) = cfrac3x5 tag12labeleq12$$



          To confirm this, substitute eqrefeq12 into eqrefeq5 to give on the left side



          $$cfrac12x5 tag13labeleq13$$



          with the right side becoming



          $$2left[cfrac3left(x + 1right)5 + cfrac3left(x - 1right)5 right] = 2left[cfracleft(3x + 3 + 3x - 3right)5 right] = cfrac12x5 tag14labeleq14$$



          Similarly, using eqrefeq12 in eqrefeq1 gives a left & right hand side of $frac12xy5$, confirming it's also a solution of the original equation. I'm not quite sure offhand how to prove it's unique, but I assume it is. We thus get a final answer of



          $$fleft(2015right) = cfrac3 times 20155 = 1209 tag15labeleq15$$



          Note: The solution could involve just "guessing" the function being a constant multiple of the argument, and then showing this works to determine the final answer, but I thought it might be useful for people to see how one can approach solving this problem somewhat systematically as I did. In particular, I tried using small constant values for $x$ and $y$, checking what information this offered, and then seeing if I could leverage this when using other values. For example, I started with $x = 0$ and $y = 0$, then used $y = 1$, $x = 1$ and $x = 3$. Each time, I used previous details to help simplify and learn more about the new values, until I saw the pattern which I then confirmed worked.






          share|cite|improve this answer














          With the provided function,



          $$fleft(4xyright) = 2yleft[fleft(x + yright) + fleft(x - yright)right] tag1labeleq1$$



          First, substitute $y = 0$ to get



          $$fleft(0right) = 0 tag2labeleq2$$



          Next, substitute $x = 0$ and use eqrefeq2 to get



          $$0 = 2yleft[fleft(yright) + fleft(-yright)right] tag3labeleq3$$



          Thus, for all values of $y$ other than $0$, dividing both sides by $2y$ gives



          $$fleft(yright) = -fleft(-yright) tag4labeleq4$$



          In other words, $f$ is an odd function. Next, substituting $y = 1$ into eqrefeq1 gives



          $$fleft(4xright) = 2left[fleft(x + 1right) + fleft(x - 1right)right] tag5labeleq5$$



          Now, using $x = 1$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2left[fleft(2right) + fleft(0right)right] tag6labeleq6$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq2 gives



          $$fleft(4right) = 2fleft(2right) tag7labeleq7$$



          Similarly, using $x = 3$ in eqrefeq5 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 2left[fleft(4right) + fleft(2right)right] tag8labeleq8$$



          Thus, using eqrefeq7 gives



          $$fleft(12right) = 6fleft(2right) tag9labeleq9$$



          Note that eqrefeq2, eqrefeq4, eqrefeq7 and eqrefeq9 all satisfy



          $$fleft(nxright) = nfleft(xright) forall ; n in N tag10labeleq10$$



          In particular, for eqrefeq2, $n = 0 ; forall ; x in R$; for eqrefeq4, $n = -1 ; forall ; x in R$; and for eqrefeq7 & eqrefeq9, $x = 2$ only, with $n = 2$ & $n = 6$, respectively. This doesn't prove eqrefeq10 always works, but it suggests that $f$ is a linear multiple of $x$, i.e, $fleft(xright) = kx text for a non-zero constant k in R$, which from the given condition of



          $$fleft(5right) = 3 tag11labeleq11$$



          gives a value of $k = frac35$ so the function would be



          $$fleft(xright) = cfrac3x5 tag12labeleq12$$



          To confirm this, substitute eqrefeq12 into eqrefeq5 to give on the left side



          $$cfrac12x5 tag13labeleq13$$



          with the right side becoming



          $$2left[cfrac3left(x + 1right)5 + cfrac3left(x - 1right)5 right] = 2left[cfracleft(3x + 3 + 3x - 3right)5 right] = cfrac12x5 tag14labeleq14$$



          Similarly, using eqrefeq12 in eqrefeq1 gives a left & right hand side of $frac12xy5$, confirming it's also a solution of the original equation. I'm not quite sure offhand how to prove it's unique, but I assume it is. We thus get a final answer of



          $$fleft(2015right) = cfrac3 times 20155 = 1209 tag15labeleq15$$



          Note: The solution could involve just "guessing" the function being a constant multiple of the argument, and then showing this works to determine the final answer, but I thought it might be useful for people to see how one can approach solving this problem somewhat systematically as I did. In particular, I tried using small constant values for $x$ and $y$, checking what information this offered, and then seeing if I could leverage this when using other values. For example, I started with $x = 0$ and $y = 0$, then used $y = 1$, $x = 1$ and $x = 3$. Each time, I used previous details to help simplify and learn more about the new values, until I saw the pattern which I then confirmed worked.







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Jan 1 at 0:04

























          answered Dec 27 '18 at 1:05









          John OmielanJohn Omielan

          1,19918




          1,19918











          • I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:08






          • 1




            @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:17











          • Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 3:14











          • I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:38










          • @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:55

















          • I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:08






          • 1




            @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 27 '18 at 2:17











          • Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
            – yuanming luo
            Dec 27 '18 at 3:14











          • I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
            – Henning Makholm
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:38










          • @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
            – John Omielan
            Dec 31 '18 at 22:55
















          I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
          – yuanming luo
          Dec 27 '18 at 2:08




          I am trying to give a reason for the 10th step.
          – yuanming luo
          Dec 27 '18 at 2:08




          1




          1




          @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
          – John Omielan
          Dec 27 '18 at 2:17





          @yuanmingluo I don't offhand see any easy way to directly prove from the provided functional equation that the function is linear. However, the various sets of values all match this so it would have to be a somewhat "perverse" function to not be linear, but the provided equation indicates it is a relatively simple function. I know this is not very precise, but it's the best I can do for now. As I mention in my answer, I am quite rusty at solving these types of problems, but I was once fairly good at it many years ago.
          – John Omielan
          Dec 27 '18 at 2:17













          Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
          – yuanming luo
          Dec 27 '18 at 3:14





          Yeah, I know. It was my first time to see this type of questions. So, I also want to do my best.
          – yuanming luo
          Dec 27 '18 at 3:14













          I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
          – Henning Makholm
          Dec 31 '18 at 22:38




          I don't see how (10) is implied by the equations you claim imply it.
          – Henning Makholm
          Dec 31 '18 at 22:38












          @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
          – John Omielan
          Dec 31 '18 at 22:55





          @HenningMakholm Thanks for your question. ($10$) works with all the equations I list. With ($2$), $fleft(0xright) = 0x forall ; x in R$; with ($4$), $fleft(-xright) = -x forall ; x in R$; with ($7$), $fleft(2 times 2right) = 2left(2right)$; & with ($9$), $fleft(6 times 2right) = 6fleft(2right)$. I have updated my solution so this is more clear. This obviously doesn't prove that ($10$) works for all values of $x$ & $n$, but it would have to be a quite unusual function for it not to. I just used the apparent pattern to determine a proposed solution that I confirmed works.
          – John Omielan
          Dec 31 '18 at 22:55


















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3053456%2fif-f4xy-2yfxyfx-y-and-f5-3-find-f2015%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown






          Popular posts from this blog

          Peggy Mitchell

          Palaiologos

          The Forum (Inglewood, California)