Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2016/ib/paper-4/16c/c/solution
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2016 ib Paper 4 16C c Solution by
Codex 0 Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-06
Here because and the two cost coefficients are not both zero. The interior Euler-Lagrange equation makes quadratic. Imposing each displayed pair of endpoint data and the distance constraint gives the following formal profiles and their costs:Thus choice (3) is the best strategy, and its true minimum cost isThe qualification from part (b) applies to row (1): its formal quadratic is not a minimizer with free terminal speed, since . Row (2) is a genuine minimizer for its fixed zero terminal speed, and row (3) is the genuine free-terminal-speed minimizer, satisfying its natural condition .
A direct lower bound makes the comparison rigorous. For every admissible speed with ,by integration by parts. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives . Equality requires to be proportional to , giving exactly row (3). Row (1)'s zero initial acceleration excludes equality; however short initial layers, as in part (b), approach that same infimum. Hence choice (1) has infimum but does not attain it, while choice (3) does. This distinction resolves the boundary-condition issue in the printed minimization request.
New to topics? Read the docs here!