| 
March 1st, 2008, 07:13 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 47 1a)Let  be an odd positive integer. Let  prove that  .
1b)Let  and  an odd positive integer. Prove that  .
2)Each man of  men throws his wallet on the table, then every one picks up a wallet randomly. Find the probability the every person takes the wrong wallet.
3)Let  and  be circles with  inside  and tangent at a point on  . Let  (  ) be circles in between  and  and tangent to  and  and to eachother adjacent circle. Let  be the points of tangency of these circles with their neighbors. Prove that  all lie on a common circle.
(Note: The solution I know does not use elementary geometry). | 
March 1st, 2008, 09:50 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Anchorage, AK
Posts: 249
Country: Thanks: 70
Thanked 120 Times in 108 Posts
| | 3. This proof isn't entirely rigorous, but contains all the major steps:
Let D be the point where  and  are tangent. Now let us define a Möbius transform  that maps D to infinity, and let us indicate images under M by primes. Now, M maps  and  to parallel lines  and  . Thus  are circles tangent to the lines  and  and to the adjacent circles in the sequence. As they are tangent to both  and  , they are all the same size, and their centers lie on the line  parallel to  and  and halfway between them. We see also that  must lie on  as well. Thus if we have the circle  in the pre-image, we see  all lie on  .
--Kevin C. | | The following users thank TwistedOne151 for this useful post: | |  | 
March 1st, 2008, 10:06 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
| | Excellent job. I would just be more specific, if  is the tangency point, define  be the the Moebius transformation, the rest follows as you said. | 
March 1st, 2008, 11:06 PM
| | Member | | Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 154
Country: Thanks: 70
Thanked 18 Times in 14 Posts
| | 2. There are  total permutations of the  wallets. Now number the wallets from  to  . The first person has a  probability of picking a wrong wallet. You would have to use a computer for this "brute force" approach.
Or let  be the probability that given  people with  wallets,  of them choose the wrong wallet. Then we want  . This is our "black box" case.
We know that  (i.e. probability all people get their wallets). Also by axiom 3 (commonly in textbooks)  . So  is the probability that there are  incorrect wallets chosen and  correct wallets chosen. These are independent events, so we can multiply probabilities. We get  . But this doesn't really give us  . So  . Plugging in values, we get the following formula (there is a pattern, I suppose you could prove it by induction):  .
So  .
Thus  . This is about  .
Then the probability that not all the people take their wrong wallets is  (some people could take wrong wallets, while other people take correct wallets).
Last edited by heathrowjohnny; March 2nd, 2008 at 03:43 AM.
| | The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to heathrowjohnny For This Useful Post: | |  | 
April 11th, 2008, 11:45 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
| | Note that  . Let  and we get  . Since  and  are both a complete system of residues, since  is odd it means,  . But  the proof is complete. This function has the property that  and  . Also,  .
In the identity,  let  and  . Thus, we get,  . Note that,  . This means,  . Split the product to get,  . We know that  (a property mentioned above) thus  . Thus,  . But  because the products run through the same values. And we have proven that  .
----
This identity belongs to Leopold Eisenstein. With it we can give a very nice short proof of the Quadradic Reciprocity Law. In fact, Enrst Kummer called this (Eisenstein's) proof to be the most beautiful of all reciprocity proofs (Taken from my Number Theory book).
If anybody wants I can post Eisenstein's proof. | | The following users thank ThePerfectHacker for this useful post: | |  | 
January 30th, 2009, 10:13 AM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Illinois
Posts: 172
Country: Thanks: 66
Thanked 42 Times in 38 Posts
| | Wow, I found these same identities with these exact proofs... I wonder if we have the same number theory book? | 
January 30th, 2009, 11:17 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 chiph588@ Wow, I found these same identities with these exact proofs... I wonder if we have the same number theory book? | I seen these identities in my number theory book by Ireland and Rosen.
I thought they were nice and posted them here. | 
January 30th, 2009, 03:59 PM
|  | Member | | Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Illinois
Posts: 172
Country: Thanks: 66
Thanked 42 Times in 38 Posts
| | Yep, that's one of my books this semester. | 
January 31st, 2009, 03:40 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 chiph588@ Yep, that's one of my books this semester. | That is a very awesome book  . | | 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 10:10 PM. | | |