| 
January 21st, 2008, 08:43 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 44 1)Let  prove that  is not an integer.
Here is a problem for the younger kids, give them a chance, please.
2)Let two trains be located 100 miles from eachother. The trains travel to eachother at 30 miles per hour. At this moment a bird flys of one train and travels to the other at the speed of 60 miles per hour, the moment it reaches the train it turns around and goes back. It does it back and forth until the trains crash and annihilate the bird. Find the total distance the bird traveled. | | The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ThePerfectHacker For This Useful Post: | |  | 
January 22nd, 2008, 01:20 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 2)Let two trains be located 100 miles from eachother. The trains travel to eachother at 30 miles per hour. At this moment a bird flys of one train and travels to the other at the speed of 60 miles per hour, the moment it reaches the train it turns around and goes back. It does it back and forth until the trains crash and annihilate the bird. Find the total distance the bird traveled. | Dist. = speed x time
For one train to complete the journey:  mins
But now we have 2 trains, going at the same speed, so they will meet at 50 miles. So for the trains to meet each other will take 100 mins.
-----
Now for the bird.
The bird has 100 minutes to go as far as he can before his imminent and brutal death... (Oh the calamity)
EDIT: This looks like such a small distance. Something doesn't seem right.
EDIT2: Messed up with the time, let me correct it.
EDIT3: There we go, 100 miles
__________________ 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.
| | The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to janvdl For This Useful Post: | |  | 
January 22nd, 2008, 11:21 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 janvdl Dist. = speed x time
For one train to complete the journey:  mins
But now we have 2 trains, going at the same speed, so they will meet at 50 miles. So for the trains to meet each other will take 100 mins.
-----
Now for the bird.
The bird has 100 minutes to go as far as he can before his imminent and brutal death... (Oh the calamity)
EDIT: This looks like such a small distance. Something doesn't seem right.
EDIT2: Messed up with the time, let me correct it.
EDIT3: There we go, 100 miles  | nice solution. another way to think about it:
two trains heading at each other at 30 mph each could be thought of as one train standing still and the other train heading toward it at 60 mph. the trains start at 100 miles apart. the bird flies off the train standing still and flies towards the train heading its way. the train and the bird meet halfway, that is, when each travel 50 miles, since they are moving at the same speed. once the bird touches the train and flies the other way, it does not pass the moving train, but stays exactly in front of it as it crashes into the standing train (since they are moving at the same speed). thus the bird flies 50 miles back to the standing train where it is crushed. thus the total distance the bird flies is 100 miles. this is a "logical solution," no knowledge of the formula for speed is necessary. it's pretty easy and quick to think through, so when you think for a few seconds and blurt out the answer, everyone can be impressed at your (apparent) calculating power. "How did he work that out so quickly?"
TPH, this question seems similar to one you've asked before. i think it was in another Problem of the Week thread. | | The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Jhevon For This Useful Post: | |  | 
January 22nd, 2008, 12:18 PM
|  | 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 Jhevon TPH, this question seems similar to one you've asked before. i think it was in another Problem of the Week thread. | Don't criticise it, at least it was the first problem of the week I was able to do. And I did it in such a physicsy manner. Topsquark's going to be so proud
__________________ 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.
| 
January 22nd, 2008, 07:46 PM
|  | Generous Contributor | | Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Angelica, NY
Posts: 7,618
Country: Thanks: 643
Thanked 2,312 Times in 2,098 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by janvdl Don't criticise it, at least it was the first problem of the week I was able to do. And I did it in such a physicsy manner. Topsquark's going to be so proud  | I am!
-Dan
__________________ Got a Physics question? Come on over to To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"I must not fear. Fear is the mind killer. Fear is the little death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain." - The Litany Against Fear, "Dune" by Frank Herbert | | The following users thank topsquark for this useful post: | |  | 
January 22nd, 2008, 08:34 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
| | A lot of people, for some reason, do this problem by summing the infinite geometric series. | 
January 22nd, 2008, 11:24 PM
|  | 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 A lot of people, for some reason, do this problem by summing the infinite geometric series.  | To be honest, i thought about doing it that way, but i was unsure of how to go to work with it. How about showing that solution?
I was thinking the distance the bird travels will get smaller and smaller with time, and from there we could get the ratio. But that also seemed like a more tedious way to do it.
__________________ 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.
| 
January 26th, 2008, 04:47 AM
|  | Junior Member | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 59
Country: Thanks: 33
Thanked 9 Times in 9 Posts
| | I like janvdl's answer. I would have never thought of that! I would have tried summing an infinite series, probably.
1)
Assume it is an integer:
1+ 1/2 + ... + 1/n = p/q
P and q have no common factors blah blah blah.
n + n/2 + ... + 1 = np/q
n(n-1) + n(n-1)/2 + ...+ 1 + (n-1) = n(n-1)p/q
n(n-1)(n-2) + n(n-1)(n-2)/2 + ...+ 1 + (n-2) + (n-1)(n-2) = n(n-1)(n-2)p/q
etc.
n! + (n-1)! = n!p/q (er- is this right?)
n + 1 = (n+1)p/q
i.f.f p=q, therefore assumption is wrong, blah blah blah?
Actually that's definitely wrong. | 
January 26th, 2008, 06:08 AM
|  | Senior Member | | Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 426
Country: Thanks: 201
Thanked 96 Times in 90 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePerfectHacker 1)Let  prove that  is not an integer. | For n = 2,  is not an integer.
Assume  is not an integer for  .
Then, take  , let
For this to not be an integer, we must have
So we must have  for some integer  . (and of course  )
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 | 
January 26th, 2008, 06:31 AM
|  | Super Member | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 723
Country: Thanks: 250
Thanked 241 Times in 195 Posts
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by DivideBy0 For n = 2,  is not an integer.
...for some integer  ....
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 | Dontcha just hate that >.<
__________________ two can keep a secret if one of them is dead | 
January 27th, 2008, 09:42 AM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 112
Country: Thanks: 5
Thanked 42 Times in 39 Posts
| | Let  .
Assume that, for some  ,  is an integer.
Let  be the product of all the denominators except for the largest prime less than  .  is clearly an integer.
Then  .
On the LHS,  is an integer, based on how we defined P and our assumption.
On the RHS, after distributing, each term becomes an integer except for the term with the largest prime as the denominator. This clearly is not an integer, so the RHS is the sum of many integers plus one non-integer, and the RHS as a whole is not an integer.
Left with the integer LHS equaling a non-integer RHS, our assumption must be false, and  must not be an integer. | | The following users thank Henderson for this useful post: | |  | 
January 31st, 2008, 10:14 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 27
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
| | Let me have a try:
problem:
1)Let  prove that  is not an integer.
Solution:
If you can prove that  is not an integer, then you can prove that  is not an integer.
Why? if you add 1 to anything that's not an integer, you get a non-integer value.
look at this function:
This rational function has asymptopes at the integers, which means that at every integer, the function approaches it, but never reaches it. This can be proven if we took the limit of the function as  and so on. This means that the value of  never becomes an integer.
I conclude that  is not an integer, therefore  is not an integer either.
Please tell me what you think. | | The following users thank Skinner for this useful post: | |  | 
February 1st, 2008, 05:46 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 Skinner Let me have a try:
problem:
1)Let  prove that  is not an integer.
Solution:
If you can prove that  is not an integer, then you can prove that  is not an integer.
Why? if you add 1 to anything that's not an integer, you get a non-integer value.
look at this function:
This rational function has asymptopes at the integers, which means that at every integer, the function approaches it, but never reaches it. This can be proven if we took the limit of the function as  and so on. This means that the value of  never becomes an integer.
I conclude that  is not an integer, therefore  is not an integer either.
Please tell me what you think. | You'll have to see what TPH thinks, but if your proof is right, i say Well Done! It's very easy to understand as well
__________________ 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.
| 
February 1st, 2008, 10:21 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 Skinner | How is this even a function? What is the value of  ? In order to talk about asymptotes you need to have a function defined at every single point (including  ) except at the asymptote points. | 
February 1st, 2008, 02:44 PM
| | Junior Member | | Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 27
Country: Thanks: 8
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
| | oh. I messed up. Fail.
Last edited by Skinner; February 1st, 2008 at 07:16 PM.
| | 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 07:46 PM. | | |