Well /sci/?
0, 0, 0
>>8732775
The only possible integer solution is (0,0,0) and that obviously doesn't really hold.
Non-integer solutions are boring and gay, just plug into wolfram. Who cares.
apple = 1
banana = 1
pineapple = (3 + sqrt(41))/2
>>8732775
Banana=1/3
Apple=1/3
Pineapple=0.381571
>>8732804
0,0,0 is not a solution at all.
apple = tasty
banana = yummy
pineapple = delicious
Apple = -1
Banana = 4
Pineapple = 11
-4, 1, -11
Here you go nigger.
>computation time exceeded
>>8732775
Obviously there are an infinite number of solutions.
Instead of using the silly fruit notation, write it as:
[eqn]{x \over (y+z)} + {y \over (x+z)} + {z \over (x + y)} = c[/eqn]
Then, using some arithmetic, you can express x, y, or z in terms of the two other variables and c. So long as no pair drawn from x, y, or z sum to 0, you can freely choose two variables and calculate the third based on the relation.
>>8732877
Because this works for literally any a and b you choose you stupid fucking nigger desu
>>8732879
use those mile long equations then, you literal faggot.
>>8732820
you must be in the 5% that can't solve it
>>8732775
Git gud.
http://dailyfeynmanlongdivisionpuzzles.blogspot.com/?m=1
>>8732872
>doesn't say what apple is
>>8732836
That's what I said, but it is the only possible solution.
As in, if you simplify all of that to get rid of the fractions and then get a polynomial in 3 variables, the only integer root is 0,0,0. But then that doesn't work for the original system that involves fractions.
>>8732775
The implication that 95% of people can solve this means it has a low value integer solution. Which is false. A puzzle that begins with a false statement is not worth solving.
>>8732960
>11 is too big of a number for me
4=fruit salad
>>8732841
This is right
Apple = Banana = Pineapple = -1/12