Math Help Forum

Math Help Forum Feed Site Feed

Go Back   Math Help Forum > MHF Lounge > Problem of the Week
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 10th, 2007, 09:12 PM
ThePerfectHacker's Avatar
Global Moderator

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country:
Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
ThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond repute
Default Problem 40

1)This problem is for the younger kids give them a chance, please. Let A,B be randomly chosen from \{ 1,2,...,2007 \} (they can be the same). What is the probability that it is possible to find two real numbers that have their product equal to A and their sum equal to B. (By the way, "real", means non-imaginary).

2)Let f(x),g(x) be continous on [0,1] so that \int_0^1 x^n f(x) dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x) dx for all n\geq 0. Prove that f(x) = g(x). (This is a classic).
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power
over people is to assure the people that they are ruling
themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully
submissive slaves." - Joseph Sobran


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
The following users thank ThePerfectHacker for this useful post:
Donate to MHF
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old November 10th, 2007, 10:03 PM
kalagota's Avatar
MHF Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Taguig City, Philippines
Posts: 1,027
Country:
Thanks: 72
Thanked 286 Times in 275 Posts
kalagota is a jewel in the roughkalagota is a jewel in the roughkalagota is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via Yahoo to kalagota
Default

f and g are cont on [0,1], then f and g are integrable.

Let F_0 = \int_0^1 x^n f(x)dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x)dx

Let f_0(x) = x^n f(x) and g_0(x) = x^n g(x)

then both f_0, g_0 are continuous on [0,1], which implies that F_0 is differentiable on [0,1], and F_0'(x) = f_0(x) = g_0(x), for all x \in [0,1] (by a corollary to the FTOC)

\implies x^n f(x) = x^n g(x)

\implies f(x) = g(x). qed
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Venimus, vidimus, comemus tui crustuli
(We came, we saw, we ate your cookies)


"if it is for the one I love, I'd still fight the law." -Ichigo


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

  #3  
Old November 10th, 2007, 10:16 PM
ThePerfectHacker's Avatar
Global Moderator

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country:
Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
ThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond repute
Default

I am sorry, I cannot follow.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kalagota View Post
f and g are cont on [0,1], then f and g are integrable.

Let F_0 = \int_0^1 x^n f(x)dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x)dx
How is this a well-defined function? Maybe for a particular value of n?

Quote:
then both f_0, g_0 are continuous on [0,1], which implies that F_0 is differentiable on [0,1], and F_0'(x) = f_0(x) = g_0(x), for all x \in [0,1] (by a corollary to the FTOC)
That is not the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
---

Remember I am saying that:
\int_0^1 f(x)dx = \int_0^1 g(x) dx, \int_0^1 xf(x) dx = \int_0^1 xg(x) dx, \int_0^1 x^2f(x) dx = \int_0^1 x^2g(x) dx, ...
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power
over people is to assure the people that they are ruling
themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully
submissive slaves." - Joseph Sobran


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #4  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:29 AM
janvdl's Avatar
Bar0n

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country:
Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
janvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant future
Send a message via MSN to janvdl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post
1)This problem is for the younger kids give them a chance, please. Let A,B be randomly chosen from \{ 1,2,...,2007 \} (they can be the same). What is the probability that it is possible to find two real numbers that have their product equal to A and their sum equal to B. (By the way, "real", means non-imaginary).
1.) (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007}) \times (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007})

= \frac{4}{4028049}

= \frac{1}{1007012,25}
__________________
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.
  #5  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:37 AM
CaptainBlack's Avatar
Grand Panjandrum
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South of England
Posts: 11,373
Country:
Thanks: 667
Thanked 3,618 Times in 2,915 Posts
CaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post
2)Let f(x),g(x) be continous on [0,1] so that \int_0^1 x^n f(x) dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x) dx for all n\geq 0. Prove that f(x) = g(x). (This is a classic).
Let P_n(x);\ n \in \mathbb(Z)_+ be an orthonormal basis of polynomials for L^2_{[0,1]}.

Then by the conditions specified in the problem:

\langle P_n, f-g \rangle =0;\ \forall n \in \mathbb{Z}_+

which implies that f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1] which as f-g is continuous implies f(x)-g(x)=0\  x\in [0,1]

RonL
__________________
Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.

Giordano Bruno
  #6  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:46 AM
angel.white's Avatar
Super Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 723
Country:
Thanks: 250
Thanked 241 Times in 195 Posts
angel.white is a jewel in the roughangel.white is a jewel in the roughangel.white is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl View Post
1.) (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007}) \times (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007})

= \frac{4}{4028049}

= \frac{1}{1007012,25}
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
  #7  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:50 AM
janvdl's Avatar
Bar0n

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country:
Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
janvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant future
Send a message via MSN to janvdl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by angel.white View Post
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.
  #8  
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:10 AM
Jhevon's Avatar
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
Jhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlack View Post
Let P_n(x);\ n \in \mathbb(Z)_+ be an orthonormal basis of polynomials for L^2_{[0,1]}.

Then by the conditions specified in the problem:

\langle P_n, f-g \rangle =0;\ \forall n \in \mathbb{Z}_+

which implies that f(x)-g(x)=0\ a.e. \in [0,1] which as f-g is continuous implies f(x)-g(x)=0\  x\in [0,1]

RonL
i always have trouble proving things that seem to me to be obvious.

would it be wrong to do this?

\int_0^1 x^n f(x)~dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x)~dx

\Rightarrow \int_0^1 x^n f(x)~dx - \int_0^1 x^n g(x)~dx = 0

\Rightarrow \int_0^1 x^n [f(x) - g(x)]~dx = 0

Obviously, the only way this integral can be zero for all x and all n is if f(x) - g(x) = 0. the result follows immediately.



Now i can see where the problem here would be, the "obviously" part.
  #9  
Old November 11th, 2007, 02:49 AM
kalagota's Avatar
MHF Contributor
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Taguig City, Philippines
Posts: 1,027
Country:
Thanks: 72
Thanked 286 Times in 275 Posts
kalagota is a jewel in the roughkalagota is a jewel in the roughkalagota is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via Yahoo to kalagota
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post

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..
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Venimus, vidimus, comemus tui crustuli
(We came, we saw, we ate your cookies)


"if it is for the one I love, I'd still fight the law." -Ichigo


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Last edited by kalagota; November 11th, 2007 at 03:32 AM.
  #10  
Old November 11th, 2007, 07:23 AM
CaptainBlack's Avatar
Grand Panjandrum
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: South of England
Posts: 11,373
Country:
Thanks: 667
Thanked 3,618 Times in 2,915 Posts
CaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond reputeCaptainBlack has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jhevon View Post
i always have trouble proving things that seem to me to be obvious.

would it be wrong to do this?

\int_0^1 x^n f(x)~dx = \int_0^1 x^n g(x)~dx

\Rightarrow \int_0^1 x^n f(x)~dx - \int_0^1 x^n g(x)~dx = 0

\Rightarrow \int_0^1 x^n [f(x) - g(x)]~dx = 0

Obviously, the only way this integral can be zero for all x and all n is if f(x) - g(x) = 0. 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
  #11  
Old November 11th, 2007, 10:07 AM
ThePerfectHacker's Avatar
Global Moderator

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country:
Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
ThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainBlank View Post
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 View Post
1.) (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007}) \times (\frac{1}{2007} + \frac{1}{2007})

= \frac{4}{4028049}

= \frac{1}{1007012,25}
How did you get that? My solution is much longer.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power
over people is to assure the people that they are ruling
themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully
submissive slaves." - Joseph Sobran


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #12  
Old November 11th, 2007, 11:32 AM
janvdl's Avatar
Bar0n

 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: South African Republic
Posts: 1,959
Country:
Thanks: 1,605
Thanked 1,421 Times in 869 Posts
janvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant futurejanvdl has a brilliant future
Send a message via MSN to janvdl
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post
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.
  #13  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:34 PM
ThePerfectHacker's Avatar
Global Moderator

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country:
Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
ThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl View Post
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.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power
over people is to assure the people that they are ruling
themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully
submissive slaves." - Joseph Sobran


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #14  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:50 PM
Jhevon's Avatar
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
Jhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond reputeJhevon has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker View Post
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 ?
  #15  
Old November 11th, 2007, 01:56 PM
ThePerfectHacker's Avatar
Global Moderator

 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 11,186
Country:
Thanks: 482
Thanked 3,754 Times in 3,070 Posts
ThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond reputeThePerfectHacker has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jhevon View Post
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 f(x) is continous on [0,1] then there exists a sequence of polynomial p_n(x) that converge uniformly to f(x). (That is the Stone-Weierstrass theorem).
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


"Democracy has proved only that the best way to gain power
over people is to assure the people that they are ruling
themselves. Once they believe that, they make wonderfully
submissive slaves." - Joseph Sobran


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Closed Thread
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
©2005 - 2009 Math Help Forum


Math Help Forum is a community of maths forums with an emphasis on maths help in all levels of mathematics.
Register to post your math questions or just hang out and try some of our math games or visit the arcade.