# S.O.S. Mathematics CyberBoard

Your Resource for mathematics help on the web!
 It is currently Wed, 24 Aug 2016 07:24:21 UTC

 All times are UTC [ DST ]

 Page 1 of 1 [ 8 posts ]
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: partitionPosted: Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:20:20 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:04:19 UTC
Posts: 2906
show that 0,1,...,2^k-1 can be partitioned into two equal sets S1 and S2 such that for any integer m<k, then:

Sum (i in S1) i^m = Sum (j in S2) j^m

where 0^0 is defined to be 1.

_________________
Has anyone noticed that the below is WRONG? Otherwise this statement would be true:

where

Last edited by bugzpodder on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:56:25 UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:09:46 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:04:19 UTC
Posts: 2906
As an example:

0^n + 3^n + 5^n + 6^n = 1^n + 2^n + 4^n + 7^n
for n = 0, 1, 2 but not 3 if we assume 0^0 = 1

_________________
Has anyone noticed that the below is WRONG? Otherwise this statement would be true:

where

Last edited by bugzpodder on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:57:07 UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:16:46 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:42:24 UTC
Posts: 834
bugzpodder wrote:
As an example:

0^n + 3^n + 5^n + 6^n = 1^n + 2^n + 4^n + 7^n
for n = 0, 1, 2 but not 3 if we assume 0^0 = 0

if we assume that 0^0 = 1 not 0. so by "equal sets" that you mentioned in your previous post,

you mean two sets with the same number of elements then.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 21:00:34 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:04:19 UTC
Posts: 2906
>> if we assume that 0^0 = 1 not 0

 0^0 should be 1, my fault[/edit]

>> so by "equal sets" that you mentioned in your previous post. you mean two sets with the same number of elements then.

correct, I am not aware of any other plausible meanings for "equal" in this case. Usually I guess equal means two sets are identical, but clearly this cant be the case here as they are partitions.

_________________
Has anyone noticed that the below is WRONG? Otherwise this statement would be true:

where

Last edited by bugzpodder on Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:57:47 UTC, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:25:37 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sat, 18 Mar 2006 08:42:24 UTC
Posts: 834
bugzpodder wrote:
Umm, 0+3+5+6=14, 1+2+4+7=14
so unless I am mistaken, here we assumes 0^0=0

well, you're mistaken! we want to have 0^0 + 3^0 +5^0 + 6^0 = 1^0 + 2^0 + 4^0 + 7^0, which holds if we define 0^0 = 1.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:56:04 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:04:19 UTC
Posts: 2906
ahh, good point. I was computing 0^1, my bad. Fixed the original post. Thanks.

_________________
Has anyone noticed that the below is WRONG? Otherwise this statement would be true:

where

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:20:54 UTC
 Senior Member

Joined: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:25:18 UTC
Posts: 105
I have a conjecture!
Spoiler:
I came up with this by considering the first 3 cases and it is the clearest pattern.
k=1, partition as 0|1
k=2, partition as 0,3|1,2
k=3: partition as 0,3,5,6|1,2,4,7

Clearly the pattern is to take the previous partition, and add the elements of the form 2^k-1-x to the set containing x.

I do not as yet have a good reason why it works beyond the first power unfortunately.

I'll think about it some more and see if I can come up with a proof or adjustment.

Top

 Post subject: Posted: Thu, 24 Jul 2008 23:29:15 UTC
 Member of the 'S.O.S. Math' Hall of Fame

Joined: Sun, 4 May 2003 16:04:19 UTC
Posts: 2906
siclar, your observation is in fact correct.

I have two comments for this. First of all, in most of these cases induction would be a good choice of proof method to proceed. (if you have a pattern and want to prove it)

Secondly, if you take this pattern, you can actually observe the exact same pattern here:
http://www.sosmath.com/CBB/viewtopic.php?t=38575

_________________
Has anyone noticed that the below is WRONG? Otherwise this statement would be true:

where

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 8 posts ]

 All times are UTC [ DST ]

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Manbin, Shadow

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
 Jump to:  Select a forum ------------------ High School and College Mathematics    Algebra    Geometry and Trigonometry    Calculus    Matrix and Linear Algebra    Differential Equations    Probability and Statistics    Proposed Problems Applications    Physics, Chemistry, Engineering, etc.    Computer Science    Math for Business and Economics Advanced Mathematics    Foundations    Algebra and Number Theory    Analysis and Topology    Applied Mathematics    Other Topics in Advanced Mathematics Other Topics    Administrator Announcements    Comments and Suggestions for S.O.S. Math    Posting Math Formulas with LaTeX    Miscellaneous