Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Online

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord of the Flies)
    \displaystyle  \prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right) \left(1+\frac{1}{p(p+1)}\right)=  \prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right)
    I thought that series look familiar. Seems a bit wrong for me to finish the problem off since you've pointed out the main part, but here goes,

    Solution 477

    I will assume the Euler product fomula, which states that \displaystyle \zeta(s)= \prod_{p} \frac{1}{1-p^{-s}}, where \displaystyle \zeta(s) denotes the Riemann zeta function. It follows from this formula that \displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta(s)}=\left( \prod_p \frac{1}{1-p^{-s}}\right)^{-1} = \prod_p \left( 1 - \frac{1}{p^s}\right).

    Since \displaystyle \left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right) \left(1+\frac{1}{p(p+1)}\right) = \left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right), we have \displaystyle \prod_p \left(1+\frac{p}{p+1}\right) = \frac{\prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right)}{\prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right)} = \frac{\zeta(3)}{\zeta(2)} as required.

    Just as a note, I don't have any experience with handling infinite series beyond high school level stuff, so I apologize if my manipulations are wrong and/or not fully argued. I just recognized the series and put together a solution.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ctrls)
    I thought that series look familiar. Seems a bit wrong for me to finish the problem off since you've pointed out the main part, but here goes,

    Solution 477

    I will assume the Euler product fomula, which states that \displaystyle \zeta(s)= \prod_{p} \frac{1}{1-p^{-s}}, where \displaystyle \zeta(s) denotes the Riemann zeta function. It follows from this formula that \displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta(s)}=\left( \prod_p \frac{1}{1-p^{-s}}\right)^{-1} = \prod_p \left( 1 - \frac{1}{p^s}\right).

    Since \displaystyle \left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right) \left(1+\frac{1}{p(p+1)}\right) = \left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right), we have \displaystyle \prod_p \left(1+\frac{p}{p+1}\right) = \frac{\prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^3}\right)}{\prod_p \left(1-\frac{1}{p^2}\right)} = \frac{\zeta(3)}{\zeta(2)} as required.

    Just as a note, I don't have any experience with handling infinite series beyond high school level stuff, so I apologize if my manipulations are wrong and/or not fully argued. I just recognized the series and put together a solution.
    The only thing stopping this being totally rigorous is showing that the product you need to find actually converges. Other than that it's dead on.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arkanm)
    I've written it up in tex and taken a print screen:



    (Note: \{x\} denotes the fractional part of x.)

    Can anyone prove this?
    I think you must have made an error, there, since that is trivially true.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by james22)
    I think you must have made an error, there, since that is trivially true.
    I thought that initially, but thinking about it it doesn't actually seem that trivially true, especially the inequalities at the end. Even if it is trivially true, the proof seems like it could be interesting.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arkanm)
    Please post your proof, I must be experiencing some major brain fart at the moment.

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    I thought that initially, but thinking about it it doesn't actually seem that trivially true, especially the inequalities at the end. Even if it is trivially true, the proof seems like it could be interesting.
    I missread the floor/ceiling functions as absolute values, which would make it trivial.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by james22)
    I missread the floor/ceiling functions as absolute values, which would make it trivial.
    That would have made it beyond trivial.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arkanm)
    The problem is equivalent to the Riemann Hypothesis. I have found a truly marvelous demonstration of this equivalence, which this margin is too narrow to contain.
    PDF it and send it to me. Thanks.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arkanm)
    I posted it on stackexchange and someone's just posted a very nice solution using continued fractions and stuff. gg folks, gg.

    I don't know the consequences of the problem though. Well it certainly solves the trinity admissions quiz problem for good:

    "I can divide the number 11 up in a number of ways, eg
    11 = 9 + 2
    11 = 3.1 + 4.5 + 3.2 + 0.2
    but what I want is the way of splitting it up so that the product of all the numbers I split it into is as large as possible. Eg for 11 = 9 + 2 the product concerned is 9 × 2 = 18. Can you find a general way of solving this puzzle so that I could have started with numbers other than 11?"

    But it seems to be very natural, and the inequality is sharp. It mysteriously boils down to the fact that e/6<1/2.
    Do you mind linking it?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Not particularly challenging but most get this question wrong.

    A bat and a ball cost £1.10, the bat costs £1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Excuse Me!)
    Not particularly challenging but most get this question wrong.

    A bat and a ball cost £1.10, the bat costs £1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
    Why is that even remotely tricky?

    5pence...
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Excuse Me!)
    Not particularly challenging but most get this question wrong.

    A bat and a ball cost £1.10, the bat costs £1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
    I saw this on 9gag last night.

    I'm ashamed to say I fell for it and said the ball cost 10p.

    brb dropping out of my degree in shame.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by In One Ear)
    Why is that even remotely tricky?

    5pence...
    Can't remember the exact reason (saw this question a while ago) but its to do with how your brain sees the information. As i said 'most' will get it wrong, not all.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Problem 478*

    (i) Prove that if
     |x - x_0| < min\left(\dfrac{\epsilon}{2(|y_0  | + 1)} , 1\right) and |y - y_0| < \dfrac{\epsilon}{2(|x_0| + 1)} .

    then |xy - x_0y_0| < \epsilon .

    *Note that: min(a,b) = a if  a < b .

    (ii) Prove that if y_0 \neq 0 and

    |y - y_0| < min\left(\dfrac{|y_0|}{2},\dfrac  {\epsilon|y_0|^2}{2}\right) .

    then  y \neq 0 and

     \left|\dfrac{1}{y} - \dfrac{1}{y_0}\right| < \epsilon .

    (iii) Replace the question marks with expressions involving  \epsilon, x_0, y_0 so that the conclusion will be true:

    If y_0 \neq 0 and

     |y - y_0| < \  ? and |x - x_0| < \  ?

    then  y \neq 0 and

    \left|\dfrac{x}{y} - \dfrac{x_0}{y_0}\right| < \epsilon.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 0x2a)
    Problem 478*

    (i) Prove that if
     |x - x_0| < min\left(\dfrac{\epsilon}{2(|y_0  | + 1)} , 1\right) and |y - y_0| < \dfrac{\epsilon}{2(|x_0| + 1)} .

    then |xy - x_0y_0| < \epsilon .

    *Note that: min(a,b) = a if  a < b .

    (ii) Prove that if y_0 \neq 0 and

    |y - y_0| < min\left(\dfrac{|y_0|}{2},\dfrac  {\epsilon|y_0|^2}{2}\right) .

    then  y \neq 0 and

     \left|\dfrac{1}{y} - \dfrac{1}{y_0}\right| < \epsilon .

    (iii) Replace the question marks with expressions involving  \epsilon, x_0, y_0 so that the conclusion will be true:

    If y_0 \neq 0 and

     |y - y_0| < \  ? and |x - x_0| < \  ?

    then  y \neq 0 and

    \left|\dfrac{x}{y} - \dfrac{x_0}{y_0}\right| < \epsilon.
    Been reading spivak?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jjpneed1)
    Been reading spivak?
    Mhm
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Prove that a sequence of n integers must contain a sub sequence whose sum is divisible by n?

    The proof I know makes use of the pigeonhole principle which isn't taught at A-Level but it very obvious and can be proved very easily.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by alex2100x)
    Prove that a sequence of n integers must contain a sub sequence whose sum is divisible by n?

    The proof I know makes use of the pigeonhole principle which isn't taught at A-Level but it very obvious and can be proved very easily.
    We did this in one of our problem classes.

    Spoiler:
    Show


    Let the sequence of integers be x1,x2,...,xn
    Consider the n sums: x1, x1+x2, x1+x2+x3, ... , x1+x2+...+xn
    If any of these sums is divisible by n, then there is nothing to prove.
    There are n-1 possible remainders when dividing the sums by n.
    So we have n pigeons and n-1 pigeon holes, so two numbers must have the same remainder when divided by n.
    Let p,q,r,a,b be integers, with p<q
    x1+x2+...+xp=an+r [1]
    x1+x2+...+xq=bn+r [2]
    [2]-[1] gives:
    n(b-a)=x{p+1}+x{p+2}+...+x{q}
    Which means that x{p+1}+x{p+2}+...+x{q} is divisible by n. Hence we now have a subsequence divisible by n.


    At the end, when I have like x{p+1} it's meant to be subscript.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rayquaza17)
    We did this in one of our problem classes.

    Spoiler:
    Show


    Let the sequence of integers be x1,x2,...,xn
    Consider the n sums: x1, x1+x2, x1+x2+x3, ... , x1+x2+...+xn
    If any of these sums is divisible by n, then there is nothing to prove.
    There are n-1 possible remainders when dividing the sums by n.
    So we have n pigeons and n-1 pigeon holes, so two numbers must have the same remainder when divided by n.
    Let p,q,r,a,b be integers, with p<q
    x1+x2+...+xp=an+r [1]
    x1+x2+...+xq=bn+r [2]
    [2]-[1] gives:
    n(b-a)=x{p+1}+x{p+2}+...+x{q}
    Which means that x{p+1}+x{p+2}+...+x{q} is divisible by n. Hence we now have a subsequence divisible by n.


    At the end, when I have like x{p+1} it's meant to be subscript.
    Try learning some TeX - if you just google TeX commands you should get several websites with lists of them. In this case, you just write:

    []x_{p+1} [/]

    Where the word "tex" is inserted in each pair of square brackets, to obtain:

     x_{p+1}
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by DJMayes)
    Try learning some TeX - if you just google TeX commands you should get several websites with lists of them. In this case, you just write:

    x_{p+1} [ /tex]



Without the space in the second tag, to obtain:



[tex] x_{p+1}
    I know how to do it, I just couldn't be bothered messing about and I thought it still makes enough sense without it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Problem 479 **

    A die is thrown until an even number appears. What is the expected value of the sum of all the scores?
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: February 22, 2018
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

Make your revision easier

Maths

Maths Forum posting guidelines

Not sure where to post? Read the updated guidelines here

Equations

How to use LaTex

Writing equations the easy way

Student revising

Study habits of A* students

Top tips from students who have already aced their exams

Study Planner

Create your own Study Planner

Never miss a deadline again

Polling station sign

Thinking about a maths degree?

Chat with other maths applicants

Can you help? Study help unanswered threads

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.