Deriving the Lattice Growth Formula

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the lattice growth formula, specifically L(n) = n^2 (n + 1)^2 / 4. Participants explore the counting of squares and rectangles in n x n matrices, seeking to understand the derivation process and the historical context of the formula.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Conceptual clarification, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant, MG, expresses interest in understanding the derivation of the lattice growth formula and shares initial observations from counting squares and rectangles in 2x2 and 3x3 matrices.
  • Another participant questions the clarity of what the lattice growth formula is counting, indicating a lack of information available online.
  • MG clarifies that L(2) and L(3) represent the total number of squares and rectangles in 2x2 and 3x3 matrices, respectively.
  • A participant outlines a systematic approach to counting rectangles by fixing the bottom-left corner and determining the possible positions for the top-right corner, leading to a formulaic representation.
  • There is a discussion about the mathematical representation of the counting process, including the use of summation symbols and pseudo-code to describe the algorithm for counting rectangles.
  • One participant points out a potential typo in the mathematical expressions, suggesting that the summation should yield n-i instead of n-1, which is acknowledged as a mistake by another participant.
  • Further clarification is provided on how to evaluate the summation expressions, including detailed steps to derive the final form of the expression related to the counting process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally engage in clarifying and refining the mathematical expressions and counting methods, but there is no consensus on the historical derivation of the formula or its broader implications.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include potential typos in mathematical expressions and the need for clearer definitions of terms used in the discussion. The derivation process relies on specific assumptions about counting methods and matrix configurations.

musicgold
Messages
303
Reaction score
19
Hi,

I am trying to understand how one can derive the lattice growth formula of

L (n) = n^2 ( n + 1)^2 / 4

I looked at 2x2 and 3x3 matrices and could count the squares and rectangles in the figure.
L (2) = 9, L (3) =36 and so on.

However, I am more interested in finding out how the first person who derived this formula would have gone about doing it. Any ideas or pointers are much appreciated.

Thanks,

MG.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
What exactly is that supposed to be counting? I tried googling lattice growth formula and your post is the only place it's mentioned on the internet
 
Office_Shredder said:
What exactly is that supposed to be counting?

Sorry about the confusion, maybe I should have been more clear. All the possible squares and rectangles in a 2x2 matrix are represented as L(2) and there are 9 such squares / rectangles. Please see the attached doc. Similarly L(3) represents all possible squares and rectangles in a 3x3 matrix.
 

Attachments

- Take for example the 2x2 square (case n=2). Mark the nodes in the grid such that you
have a total of 9 nodes. We also introduce a cartesian coordinate system such that
we can identify each node via its coordinates (see attachment).



- The question is how do you systematically search for rectangles?
We first notice that a rectangle is completely determined by its bottom-left corner and top-right corner.



- Let's leave the bottom-left corner fixed. How many rectangles are there with
the bottom-left corner fixed at (0,0)?

To answer this question we let the top-right corner move to all allowed positions:

bottom-left corner: (0,0)
=> top-right corner: (1,1), (2,1), (1,2), (2,2)
=> 4 rectangles



- To get all rectangles we also allow the bottom-left corner to move:

bottom-left corner: (1,0)
=> top-right corner: (1,2), (2,2)
=> 2 rectangles

bottom-left corner: (0,1)
=> top-right corner: (1,2), (2,2)
=> 2 rectangles

bottom-left corner: (1,1)
=> top-right corner: (2,2)
=> 1 rectangles

Total number of rectangles: 4+2+2+1 = 9

----

We now have to find a formula for the general case.
Our tactic is to move the bottom-left corner and count the number
of possible positions for the right-top corner.

A pseudo-code for a function that calculates the number
of rectangles is given below:

Code:
numberOfRectangles(n):
   counter = 0
   for(j=0...n-1):
      for(i=0...n-1):
         for(y=j+1...n):
	    for(x=i+1...n):
	       counter = counter + 1
   return counter

The first two loops describe the movement of the left-bottom corner
with (i,j) being the position of the left-bottom corner.

The next two loops describe the movment of the right-top corner
with (x,y) being the position of the right-top corner.

You can translate the pseudo-code into mathematics by using the summation symbol:
The inner loop
Code:
	    for(x=i+1...n):
	       counter = counter + 1

corresponds to:
\sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = n-(i+1)+1 = n-1

The next loop
Code:
         for(y=j+1...n):
	    for(x=i+1...n):
	       counter = counter + 1

corresponds to:
\sum_{y=j+1}^n \sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = \sum_{y=j+1}^n (n-i) = (n-i) \sum_{y=j+1}^n 1 = (n-i)(n-j)


The next loop
Code:
      for(i=0...n-1):
         for(y=j+1...n):
	    for(x=i+1...n):
	       counter = counter + 1

corresponds to:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \sum_{y=j+1}^n \sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j)<br /> = ... = (n-j) \cdot \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)


The last loop
Code:
   for(j=0...n-1):
      for(i=0...n-1):
         for(y=j+1...n):
	    for(x=i+1...n):
	       counter = counter + 1


corresponds to:
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1} \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} \sum_{y=j+1}^n \sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = \sum_{j=0}^{n-1} (n-j) \cdot \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)<br /> = ... = \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)^2

I remember having encountered this problem in the excellent book "Thinking mathematically" by John Mason.
 

Attachments

  • lattice.png
    lattice.png
    12.8 KB · Views: 501
Edgardo,

First of all, thanks from the bottom of my heart. That is really helpful.
I understood the most of your solution except two points.

\sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = n-(i+1)+1 = n-1

I feel that this should be n-i

Also in the following equation,

\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j)= ... = (n-j) \cdot \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)
I am not sure how you got the second part of the answer. I think

\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} 1= (n-i)
 
musicgold said:
Edgardo,

First of all, thanks from the bottom of my heart. That is really helpful.
I understood the most of your solution except two points.

\sum_{x=i+1}^n 1 = n-(i+1)+1 = n-1

I feel that this should be n-i

Oops, you are right, that's a typo. It should indeed be n-i .


musicgold said:
Also in the following equation,

\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j)= ... = (n-j) \cdot \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)
I am not sure how you got the second part of the answer. I think

\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} 1= (n-i)

Let's examine the expression
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j)

Since we sum over the index i we can pull things that are independent of i
in front of the summation symbol. We see that (n-j) is independent of i:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j) = (n-j) \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)

Let's concentrate on the sub-expression
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)

The sum is applied to n and to (-i) and we get:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i) = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} n - \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} i

These sums are evaluated:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} n = n \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} 1 = n \cdot n = n^2

\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} i = \frac{(n-1)n}{2}

For the last evaluation I've used http://www.ugrad.math.ubc.ca/coursedoc/math101/notes/integration/sums.html".
We get for the sub-expression:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i) = \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} n - \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} i = n^2 - \frac{(n-1)n}{2} = n^2 - \frac{n^2-n}{2} = \frac{n^2+n}{2}= \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)

Plugging this sub-expression into the expression yields:
\sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i)(n-j) = (n-j) \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (n-i) = (n-j) \left( n\cdot \frac{(n+1)}{2} \right)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edgardo,

Now it is clear to me. Thank you very much. Appreciate your efforts.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
787
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
6K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K