| 
November 10th, 2007, 09:12 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
| | Problem 40 1)This problem is for the younger kids give them a chance, please. Let  be randomly chosen from  (they can be the same). What is the probability that it is possible to find two real numbers that have their product equal to  and their sum equal to  . (By the way, "real", means non-imaginary).
2)Let  be continous on ![[0,1] [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/ccfcd347d0bf65dc77afe01a3306a96b-1.gif) so that  for all  . Prove that  . (This is a classic). | | The following users thank ThePerfectHacker for this useful post: | |  | 
November 10th, 2007, 10:03 PM
|  | MHF Contributor | | Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Taguig City, Philippines
Posts: 1,027
Country: Thanks: 72
Thanked 286 Times in 275 Posts
| | f and g are cont on [0,1], then f and g are integrable.
Let
Let  and
then both  are continuous on [0,1], which implies that  is differentiable on [0,1], and  , for all ![x \in [0,1] x \in [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/c75c22c0876976bad2957525698cc870-1.gif) (by a corollary to the FTOC)  . qed | 
November 10th, 2007, 10:16 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
| | I am sorry, I cannot follow. Quote:
Originally Posted by kalagota f and g are cont on [0,1], then f and g are integrable.
Let  | How is this a well-defined function? Maybe for a particular value of  ? That is not the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
---
Remember I am saying that:  ,  ,  , ... | 
November 11th, 2007, 01:29 AM
|  | Bar0n | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country: Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker 1)This problem is for the younger kids give them a chance, please. Let  be randomly chosen from  (they can be the same). What is the probability that it is possible to find two real numbers that have their product equal to  and their sum equal to  . (By the way, "real", means non-imaginary). | 1.)
=
=
__________________ If you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. - Linus Torvalds To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
| 
November 11th, 2007, 01:37 AM
|  | Grand Panjandrum | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: South of England
Posts: 11,373
Country: Thanks: 667
Thanked 3,618 Times in 2,915 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker 2)Let  be continous on ![[0,1] [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/ccfcd347d0bf65dc77afe01a3306a96b-1.gif) so that  for all  . Prove that  . (This is a classic). | Let  be an orthonormal basis of polynomials for ![L^2_{[0,1]} L^2_{[0,1]}](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/5db46b10e1131cc4ec97766ea2d6049c-1.gif) .
Then by the conditions specified in the problem:
which implies that ![f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1] f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/67f3b737ea49dd79262bc3460726816b-1.gif) which as f-g is continuous implies
RonL
__________________ Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.
Giordano Bruno | 
November 11th, 2007, 01:46 AM
|  | Super Member | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 723
Country: Thanks: 250
Thanked 241 Times in 195 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl | Hmm, that is much simpler than the method I thought of in my head (I'm a bit too embarrassed to say what my method was, but I'll just say it involves a new pack of pencils, a full ream of paper, a gallon of coffee, a carton of cigarettes, and no obligations for several days.)
__________________ two can keep a secret if one of them is dead | 
November 11th, 2007, 01:50 AM
|  | Bar0n | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country: Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by angel.white Hmm, that is much simpler than the method I thought of in my head (I'm a bit too embarrassed to say what my method was, but I'll just say it involves a new pack of pencils, a full ream of paper, a gallon of coffee, a carton of cigarettes, and no obligations for several days.) | Haha, doesn't mean my method is right you know
__________________ If you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. - Linus Torvalds To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
| 
November 11th, 2007, 02:10 AM
|  | vs Jhevon | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New York, USA
Posts: 11,104
Country: Thanks: 2,610
Thanked 4,271 Times in 3,970 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack Let  be an orthonormal basis of polynomials for ![L^2_{[0,1]} L^2_{[0,1]}](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/5db46b10e1131cc4ec97766ea2d6049c-1.gif) .
Then by the conditions specified in the problem:
which implies that ![f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1] f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/67f3b737ea49dd79262bc3460726816b-1.gif) which as f-g is continuous implies
RonL | i always have trouble proving things that seem to me to be obvious.
would it be wrong to do this?
Obviously, the only way this integral can be zero for all x and all n is if  . the result follows immediately.
Now i can see where the problem here would be, the "obviously" part. | 
November 11th, 2007, 02:49 AM
|  | MHF Contributor | | Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Taguig City, Philippines
Posts: 1,027
Country: Thanks: 72
Thanked 286 Times in 275 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker
That is not the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
--- | i think i clearly state that the reason is from a corollary to FTOC and not to FTOC itself..
anyways, i am not really good at this..
EDIT: now i get what you mean.. thx for that remark..
Last edited by kalagota; November 11th, 2007 at 03:32 AM.
| 
November 11th, 2007, 07:23 AM
|  | Grand Panjandrum | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: South of England
Posts: 11,373
Country: Thanks: 667
Thanked 3,618 Times in 2,915 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Jhevon i always have trouble proving things that seem to me to be obvious.
would it be wrong to do this?
Obviously, the only way this integral can be zero for all x and all n is if  . the result follows immediately.
Now i can see where the problem here would be, the "obviously" part. | These proofs are thinly disguised use of the Stone-Weierstrass theorem.
RonL
__________________ Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.
Giordano Bruno | 
November 11th, 2007, 10:07 AM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlank These proofs are thinly disguised use of the Stone-Weierstrass theorem. | You got the main part right! Weierstrass theorem is the secret trick here. Quote: |
Originally Posted by Jhevon Now i can see where the problem here would be, the "obviously" part. | It is really not that obvious. Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl | How did you get that? My solution is much longer. | 
November 11th, 2007, 11:32 AM
|  | Bar0n | | Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country: Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker How did you get that? My solution is much longer. | Haha, i guess what matters is if we got the same answer? And if mine is right?
__________________ If you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you're screwed anyway, and should fix your program. - Linus Torvalds To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
| 
November 11th, 2007, 01:34 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl Haha, i guess what matters is if we got the same answer? And if mine is right? | I have no idea what the answer is, I only created the problem and thus know how to solve it. I did not fully solve it. | 
November 11th, 2007, 01:50 PM
|  | vs Jhevon | | Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: New York, USA
Posts: 11,104
Country: Thanks: 2,610
Thanked 4,271 Times in 3,970 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker You got the main part right! Weierstrass theorem is the secret trick here. | are you saying we should approximate f(x) - g(x) with some other polynomial, say h(x), and show that we must have h(x) = 0 ? | 
November 11th, 2007, 01:56 PM
|  | Global Moderator | | Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country: Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by Jhevon are you saying we should approximate f(x) - g(x) with some other polynomial, say h(x), and show that we must have h(x) = 0 ? | Hint: If  is continous on ![[0,1] [0,1]](http://www.mathhelpforum.com/math-help/latex2/img/ccfcd347d0bf65dc77afe01a3306a96b-1.gif) then there exists a sequence of polynomial  that converge uniformly to  . (That is the Stone-Weierstrass theorem). | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:48 PM. | | |