Find Smallest Positive Integer

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Integer Positive
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the smallest positive integer \( n \) such that for every integer \( m \) with \( 0 < m < 1993 \), there exists an integer \( k \) satisfying the inequality \( \frac{m}{1993} < \frac{k}{n} < \frac{m+1}{1994} \). The scope includes mathematical reasoning and problem-solving related to inequalities and integer properties.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the smallest value of \( n \) is 3987, providing examples with specific values of \( m \) to illustrate their reasoning.
  • One participant mentions the need for a formula but admits to not having one, while another expresses uncertainty about the correctness of the proposed value of \( n \).
  • There are discussions about the implications of the inequalities and whether the proposed value of \( n \) satisfies the conditions laid out in the problem.
  • Some participants correct earlier claims regarding the sequences of fractions, indicating potential errors in reasoning or calculations.
  • One participant suggests that while 3987 seems to be a candidate for the smallest \( n \), they do not provide a definitive proof that it is the smallest.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that 3987 is a candidate for the smallest positive integer \( n \), but there is no consensus on whether it is definitively the smallest, as some express doubts and seek further clarification.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved mathematical steps and assumptions regarding the inequalities and the properties of the integers involved. Some calculations are noted as potentially incorrect, and the reasoning behind the proposed values remains contested.

anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Find the smallest positive integer $n$ such that for every integer $m$ with $0<m<1993$, there exists an integer $k$ for which $$\frac{m}{1993}<\frac{k}{n}<\frac{m+1}{1994}$$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
anemone said:
Find the smallest positive integer $n$ such that for every integer $m$ with $0<m<1993$, there exists an integer $k$ for which $$\frac{m}{1993}<\frac{k}{n}<\frac{m+1}{1994}$$.
Terrific puzzle, Anemone!

Smallest n = 3987

Example using low m (1) and high m (1992):

(m + 1) / 1994 > k / n > m / 1993

m = 1:
2 / 1994 > 3 / 3987 > 1 / 1993

m = 1992:
1993 / 1994 > 3985 / 3987 > 1992 / 1993

Unfortunately, got no exotic formula for you (Bandit)
 
Wilmer said:
Terrific puzzle, Anemone!

Smallest n = 3987

Example using low m (1) and high m (1992):

(m + 1) / 1994 > k / n > m / 1993

m = 1:
2 / 1994 > 3 / 3987 > 1 / 1993

m = 1992:
1993 / 1994 > 3985 / 3987 > 1992 / 1993

Hi Wilmer,

Thanks for participating and thanks for the compliment to this problem as well.:)

Yes, 3987 is the answer to this problem but...

Wilmer said:
Unfortunately, got no exotic formula for you(Bandit)

30 minutes in the corner, please...(Tongueout)

 
anemone said:
30 minutes in the corner, please...(Tongueout)

No fair! You only asked: "Find the smallest positive integer [FONT=MathJax_Math-italic]n" (Punch)
 
I'll post the solution in full later because I think there might be others who still want to attempt it!
 
anemone said:
Find the smallest positive integer $n$ such that for every integer $m$ with $0<m<1993$, there exists an integer $k$ for which $$\frac{m}{1993}<\frac{k}{n}<\frac{m+1}{1994}$$.
we know $0<\dfrac {k}{n}<1$
using $0<\dfrac {1}{2}<\dfrac {2}{3}<\dfrac {3}{4}<--<\dfrac {3985}{3986}<\dfrac {3986}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{3988}<1$
$2\times \dfrac {m}{3986}<\dfrac {k_0}{n_0}<2\times \dfrac{m+1}{3988}<1$
take $n=n_0 ,\,\, and \,\, k=k_0$
now it is easy to see that the smallese value of n =3987
 
Last edited:
Albert said:
we know $0<\dfrac {k}{n}<1$
using $0<\dfrac {1}{2}<\dfrac {2}{3}<\dfrac {3}{4}<--<\dfrac {3995}{3996}<\dfrac {3996}{3997}<\dfrac {3997}{3998}<1$
$2\times \dfrac {m}{3996}<\dfrac {k_0}{n_0}<2\times \dfrac{m+1}{3998}<1$
take $n=n_0 ,\,\, and \,\, k=k_0$
now it is easy to see that the smallese value of n =3997

Hi Albert,

Thanks for participating and I assume you meant $$\dfrac {3985}{3986}<\dfrac {3986}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{3988}$$ rather than $$\dfrac {3995}{3996}<\dfrac {3996}{3997}<\dfrac {3997}{3998}$$, is that true?If that's true, according to your reasoning we would arrive to $$\dfrac {3985}{1993}<\dfrac {2(3986)}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{1994}$$ and I don't think this helps much as what the original question stated is it wants the difference between the two numerators on both fractions to be 1 but $3987-3985=2$. Hmm...What do you think, Albert?
 
anemone said:
Find the smallest positive integer $n$ such that for every integer $m$ with $0<m<1993$, there exists an integer $k$ for which $$\frac{m}{1993}<\frac{k}{n}<\frac{m+1}{1994}$$.
If $$\frac ab < \frac cd$$ then $$\frac ab < \frac{a+c}{b+d} < \frac cd$$ (assuming that all those numbers are positive). Therefore $$\frac m{1993} < \frac {2m+1}{3987} < \frac{m+1}{1994}.$$

(But that doesn't prove that $3987$ is the smallest such number.)
 
Solution:

If we have $$\frac{1992}{1993}<\frac{k}{n}<\frac{1993}{1994}$$, then $$\frac{1993-1992}{1993}>\frac{n-k}{n}>\frac{1994-1993}{1994}$$.

Simplifying we get

$$\frac{1}{1993}>\frac{n-k}{n}>\frac{1}{1994}$$

$$1993<\frac{n}{n-k}<1994$$

Clearly $$n-k \ne 1$$, so $$n-k \ge 2$$.

Hence, $$n>1993(n-k) \ge 3986$$ and so $n \ge 3987$.

Remark: This method of solving isn't mine, I saw it somewhere and wanted so much to share it here with MHB.
 
  • #10
anemone said:
Hi Albert,

Thanks for participating and I assume you meant $$\dfrac {3985}{3986}<\dfrac {3986}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{3988}$$ rather than $$\dfrac {3995}{3996}<\dfrac {3996}{3997}<\dfrac {3997}{3998}$$, is that true?If that's true, according to your reasoning we would arrive to $$\dfrac {3985}{1993}<\dfrac {2(3986)}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{1994}$$ and I don't think this helps much as what the original question stated is it wants the difference between the two numerators on both fractions to be 1 but $3987-3985=2$. Hmm...What do you think, Albert?

sorry :o a mistake in calculation , now I will do this way :
$\dfrac {2m}{3986}\leq \dfrac{3984}{3986}\approx 0.999498243$
$\dfrac {2m+2}{3988}\leq \dfrac{3986}{3988}\approx 0.999498495$
for any 0<m<1993 ($m\in N$)
and we will find min(n) satisfying :
$\dfrac {3984}{3986}<\dfrac{k}{n}<\dfrac {3986}{3988}<1-----(1)$
$\dfrac {-3986}{3988}<\dfrac{-k}{n}<\dfrac {-3984}{3986}$

$\dfrac {2}{3988}<\dfrac{n-k}{n}<\dfrac {2}{3986}$

the rest is the same as the solution from anemone
in fact from (1) it is clear to see min(n)=3987
 
Last edited:
  • #11
Albert said:
we know $0<\dfrac {k}{n}<1$
using $0<\dfrac {1}{2}<\dfrac {2}{3}<\dfrac {3}{4}<--<\dfrac {3985}{3986}<\dfrac {3986}{3987}<\dfrac {3987}{3988}<1$
$2\times \dfrac {m}{3986}<\dfrac {k_0}{n_0}<2\times \dfrac{(m+1)}{3988}<1$
take $n=n_0 ,\,\, and \,\, k=k_0$
now it is easy to see that the smallese value of n =3987
the previous post (a mistake in calculation) has been changed above
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K