MHB Functional Equation: A, B, C Answers

  • Thread starter Thread starter juantheron
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Functional
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a functional equation for a function f: ℕ → ℕ, which satisfies specific properties involving coprime natural numbers and primes. It concludes that since f(1) = 0, and using the properties of primes, it follows that f(2) must also equal 0, leading to the conclusion that f(p) = 0 for all primes. This creates a potential contradiction when analyzing the function further, particularly with the values of f(2) and f(5). The participants suggest that if this does not lead to a contradiction, it may provide a complete solution, but there is a possibility that a condition is missing from the original problem statement. The discussion highlights the complexities and implications of the functional equation in question.
juantheron
Messages
243
Reaction score
1
http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\hspace{-20}$%20A%20function%20$f:\mathbb{N}%20\rightarrow%20\mathbb{N}$%20and%20satisfies%20$f(ab)%20=%20f(a)+f(b)$.\\%20Where%20$a$%20and%20$b$%20are%20Coprime%20Natural%20no.\\%20and%20$f(c+d)%20=%20f(c)+f(d)\forall$%20prime%20no.%20$c$%20and%20$d$.%20Then\\%20(a)%20The%20value%20of%20$f(1)+f(2)+f(3)%20=%20$\\%20(b)%20$\frac{f(5)+f(7)}{f(4)}%20=$\\%20(c)%20$f(9)-f(6)+f(3)%20=%20$
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
jacks said:
http://latex.codecogs.com/gif.latex?\hspace{-20}$%20A%20function%20$f:\mathbb{N}%20\rightarrow%20\mathbb{N}$%20and%20satisfies%20$f(ab)%20=%20f(a)+f(b)$.\\%20Where%20$a$%20and%20$b$%20are%20Coprime%20Natural%20no.\\%20and%20$f(c+d)%20=%20f(c)+f(d)\forall$%20prime%20no.%20$c$%20and%20$d$.%20Then\\%20(a)%20The%20value%20of%20$f(1)+f(2)+f(3)%20=%20$\\%20(b)%20$\frac{f(5)+f(7)}{f(4)}%20=$\\%20(c)%20$f(9)-f(6)+f(3)%20=%20$

Since \(1\) is coprime to every natural \(f(1)=0\).

Also since for any prime \(c>2\) we have \(f(2c)=f(2)+f(c)\) and \(f(2c)=f(c+c)=f(c)+f(c)\) we conclude that \(f(c)=f(2)\), which is sufficient to allow us to answer (a), (b) and (c) in terms of \(f(2)\).

At present I don't see any means of evaluating \(f(2)\).CB
 
Last edited:
CaptainBlack said:
Since \(1\) is coprime to every natural \(f(1)=0\).

Also since for any prime \(c>2\) we have \(f(2c)=f(2)+f(c)\) and \(f(2c)=f(c+c)=f(c)+f(c)\) we conclude that \(f(c)=f(2)\), which is sufficient to allow us to answer (a), (b) and (c) in terms of \(f(2)\).

CB
But that leads to something strange if you put $c=2$ and $d=3$, because it then follows that $f(2) = f(5) = f(2+3) = f(2) + f(3) = 2f(2).$ Thus $f(2)=0$ and hence $f(p)=0$ for every prime $p.$
 
Opalg said:
But that leads to something strange if you put $c=2$ and $d=3$, because it then follows that $f(2) = f(5) = f(2+3) = f(2) + f(3) = 2f(2).$ Thus $f(2)=0$ and hence $f(p)=0$ for every prime $p.$

If that does not entail a contradiction then that gives us a full solution, including undefined for (b), it also answers the implied question I added to my post between you starting to reply and my seeing your reply :) . Alternativly there is a condition missing from the statement of the question.

CB
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagoras'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top