Apostol & floor function problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter HamishMc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Apostol Function
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem from Apostol's Calculus text, specifically concerning the equivalence of two summation expressions involving the floor function and index changes. The participants are exploring the implications of changing the index of summation and the conditions under which the equality holds.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the equivalence of two summation expressions and the conditions necessary for this equivalence. Some suggest a change of index as a method to explore the relationship between the two sums, while others question the validity of the equality under certain conditions.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights into the problem and questioning the assumptions regarding the variables involved. Some have offered specific conditions for the variables, indicating a productive exploration of the topic.

Contextual Notes

It is noted that the variables a and b are positive integers and coprime, which may influence the discussion on the equivalence of the summation expressions.

HamishMc
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm working through some questions in Apostol's Calculus text (vol. 1). The problem is with ex. 7 on p.64. Here, he states that

"by changing the index of summation, note that

[tex]\sum_{n=a}^{b-1} [\frac{na}{b}] = \sum_{n=a}^{b-1} [\frac{a(b-n)}{b}][\tex] "<br /> <br /> I'm comfortable with the solution from this point on. I just don't see how these two are equivalent.<br /> <br /> Any help would be appreciated!<br /> <br /> p.s. Sorry about the LaTeX not displaying properly.[/tex]
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
HamishMc said:
Hi,

I'm working through some questions in Apostol's Calculus text (vol. 1). The problem is with ex. 7 on p.64. Here, he states that

"by changing the index of summation, note that

[tex]\sum_{n=a}^{b-1} [\frac{na}{b}] = \sum_{n=a}^{b-1} [\frac{a(b-n)}{b}][/tex] "

I'm comfortable with the solution from this point on. I just don't see how these two are equivalent.

Any help would be appreciated!

p.s. Sorry about the LaTeX not displaying properly.

Are there any specific conditions on a,b and n?

(I can't see the answer to your question; just thought I'd get the LaTex working for you!)
 
It works if you make the change of index n=b-m. Then,

[tex]\sum_{n=a}^{b-1} [\frac{na}{b}] = \sum_{m=b-a}^{1} [\frac{a(b-m)}{b}][/tex]

You can use Gauss's sum [itex]\sum_i^n i=n(n+1)/2[/itex] to show that the equality you wrote is not true unless a=1 or a=b.
 
Last edited:
You're just doing the sum in reverse order.
 
cristo said:
Are there any specific conditions on a,b and n?

Thanks for the responses. The conditions are that a and b are positive integers, and that they are coprime. Sorry for not stating that at the outset.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K