Welcome to Incels.is - Involuntary Celibate Forum

Welcome! This is a forum for involuntary celibates: people who lack a significant other. Are you lonely and wish you had someone in your life? You're not alone! Join our forum and talk to people just like you.

SuicideFuel Math thread problem (official)

Prove that, if a, b, c are natural numbers such that 1/a + 1/b + 1/c < 1, then 1/a + 1/b + 1/c ⩽ 41/42.

WLOG a >= b >= c. The pareto front of triples is (2, 3, 7), (2, 4, 5), (3, 3, 4), and (2, 3, 7) gives the maximum value 41/42.
 
WLOG a >= b >= c. The pareto front of triples is (2, 3, 7), (2, 4, 5), (3, 3, 4), and (2, 3, 7) gives the maximum value 41/42.
Correct of course. I'd never heard the term "Pareto front" before tho :feelswhere: the more I know :feelsstudy:
 
Find the next number in the sequence: 1, 20, 693, 40064, ?
 
Find the next number in the sequence: 1, 20, 693, 40064, ?

The interpolated polynomial for the respective x values at 0, 1, 2, 3 is 1 + (37120 x)/3 - 18695 x^2 + (19022 x^3)/3 and at x = 4 this is 156177.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given x > 1, evaluate the sum:

(2^i) / (1 + x^(2^i)) for i = 0 to infinity
 
The interpolated polynomial for the respective x values at 0, 1, 2, 3 is 1 + (37120 x)/3 - 18695 x^2 + (19022 x^3)/3 and at x = 4 this is 156177.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given x > 1, evaluate the sum:

(2^i) / (1 + x^(2^i)) for i = 0 to infinity
It's not 156177
 
Given x > 1, evaluate the sum:

(2^i) / (1 + x^(2^i)) for i = 0 to infinity
1/(x − 1) − \sum_{i=0}^n 2^i / (x^(2^i) + 1) = 2^(n+1) / (x^(2^(n+1)) − 1) which tends to 0 as n goes to infinity because x > 1
 
3,215,625,361,728,000,576,908,800,647,833,828,166,212,393,188,480
1715617200179
 
Quick and easy problem. Let a & b be positive integers. Find the minimal value of a + b such that 5/9 < a/b < 4/7 (and prove your claim).
 
Quick and easy problem. Let a & b be positive integers. Find the minimal value of a + b such that 5/9 < a/b < 4/7 (and prove your claim).

5/9 is LRLL on Stern Brocot

4/7 is LRLLL

LRLLLR is 9/16 (minimum prefix for any value between LRLL and LRLLL)
 
5/9 is LRLL on Stern Brocot

4/7 is LRLLL

LRLLLR is 9/16 (minimum prefix for any value between LRLL and LRLLL)

Typo: 4/7 is LRLL, 5/9 is LRLLL

this solution is way cool, except that it's not immediately obvious to me why this actually works

I got slightly lucky with the representation of the 2 numbers, if one was not a substring of another it would require a bit more work.

Basically every string can be arranged lexicographically with R moving in the positive direction and L in the negative direction, with empty space as neutral. Sorting all of these strings corresponds to sorted rational numbers.

Also, a string which is a prefix of another string will correspond to a fraction that has a numerator and denominator of at most the fraction associated with the longer string (due to the rules of the tree generation).

Looking at the tree structure, 5/9 is the left node of 4/7, so the right node of 5/9, which is 9/16, is the root of the tree of all fractions between 5/9 and 4/7.
 
This might be slightly off topic for this thread:

Prove that given no other outside forces, the time to go through a diametric tunnel of a spherical planet is the same as the length of a half orbit.
 
Typo: 4/7 is LRLL, 5/9 is LRLLL



I got slightly lucky with the representation of the 2 numbers, if one was not a substring of another it would require a bit more work.

Basically every string can be arranged lexicographically with R moving in the positive direction and L in the negative direction, with empty space as neutral. Sorting all of these strings corresponds to sorted rational numbers.

Also, a string which is a prefix of another string will correspond to a fraction that has a numerator and denominator of at most the fraction associated with the longer string (due to the rules of the tree generation).

Looking at the tree structure, 5/9 is the left node of 4/7, so the right node of 5/9, which is 9/16, is the root of the tree of all fractions between 5/9 and 4/7.
I know how the Stern-Brocot tree works. All I'm saying is that I find your proof lacking. Personally I don't find it trivial that the a/b your procedure ends up yielding has minimal a + b starting from the definition of the Stern-Brocot tree.
 
This might be slightly off topic for this thread:

Prove that given no other outside forces, the time to go through a diametric tunnel of a spherical planet is the same as the length of a half orbit.
someone really ought to make a physics problem thread
 
I know how the Stern-Brocot tree works. All I'm saying is that I find your proof lacking. Personally I don't find it trivial that the a/b your procedure ends up yielding has minimal a + b starting from the definition of the Stern-Brocot tree.

The leaves of a node must have their numerator and denominator be at least the values of the node.

5/9 is the left leaf of 4/7, and since the tree is an infinite binary tree, the right leaf of 5/9 must be the root of everything between 5/9 and 4/7 because of how a binary tree works.
 
The leaves of a node must have their numerator and denominator be at least the values of the node.

5/9 is the left leaf of 4/7, and since the tree is an infinite binary tree, the right leaf of 5/9 must be the root of everything between 5/9 and 4/7 because of how a binary tree works.
Putting these together indeed works. All of this was already in your previous post, but in my hurry I didn't put the pieces together. Sorry about that.
 
someone really ought to make a physics problem thread
Second this, including topics on EM and relativity (no quantum or particle physics).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given the set of ordered pairs (x, y) with x and y as integers and 0 <= x < 2n, 0 <= y < 2m, for some positive integers m and n, prove that there are an odd number of ways to partition the set into subsets of the form {(x_1, y_1), (x_1, y_2), (x_2, y_1), (x_2, y_2)} with x_1 < x_2 and y_1 < y_2.
 
Given the set of ordered pairs (x, y) with x and y as integers and 0 <= x < 2n, 0 <= y < 2m, for some positive integers m and n, prove that there are an odd number of ways to partition the set into subsets of the form {(x_1, y_1), (x_1, y_2), (x_2, y_1), (x_2, y_2)} with x_1 < x_2 and y_1 < y_2.
I think the following works

I'll prove the claim via induction on n. If n = 1, then there are clearly (2m)! / (m! * 2^m) = (2m − 1)!! (odd because product of odd numbers) partitions into rectangular quartets, which is how I'll refer to those special subsets. Suppose we know the claim is true for n = p. Consider the case n = p + 1 and consider the function on partitions into rectangular quartets that swaps every instance of y = 0 with y = 1. Note that this function pairs up those partitions into rectangular quartets where y = 0 and y = 1 do NOT always occur together (e.g., if y = 0 and y = 2 were to occur with the same x as y = 1 and y = 2, then the pair (x, 2) would appear twice) so it suffices to show that there are oddly many partitions into rectangular quartets where y = 0 and y = 1 DO always occur together. However, in this case the number of partitions into rectangular quartets is simply the product of the cases n = p and n = 1, both of which are odd, so their product will be odd as well.
 

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

shape1
shape2
shape3
shape4
shape5
shape6
Back
Top