Math Challenge - June 2020

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
156 replies · 22K views
PeroK said:
[...]
This generates an infinite sequence of distinct eigenvalues, unless for some ##k## we have:
$$v_{k+1} = [B + \frac {\lambda_k \alpha}{\beta}I]v_k = 0$$ In which case, ##v_k## is a common eigenvector of ##A## and ##B + \frac {\lambda_k\, \alpha}{\beta}I##, hence also an eigenvector of ##B##.
A very minor improvement is that the equation above implies immediately that ##v_k## is an eigenvector of ##B## with eigenvalue ##-\lambda_k\, \alpha/\beta~## .

I'd been thinking along related lines, but my logic was a bit different. In your terminology, we have $$A v_2 ~=~ (\lambda_1 + \beta) v_2 ~.$$ If ##A## does NOT have a (nonzero) eigenvector with that eigenvalue, then the only solution is ##v_2 = 0##, hence $$B v_1 = -\lambda_1 \alpha/\beta \; v_1$$ so ##v_1## is an eigenvector of ##B##.

Else, we act again with ##(B + \lambda_1 \alpha/\beta)## on ##v_2##, giving a ##v_3## with a different constant, and we can apply the same reasoning as in the previous paragraph. This algorithm must terminate because an ##n\times n## matrix has at most ##n## eigenvalues.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
strangerep said:
Thank you to @Infrared for posing this question.

Hi, strangerep. Great solutions. But I still have a problem.

I do not understand this statement
the vector ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must be a multiple of an ##A##-eigenvector

Why ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must be a multiple of an ##A##-eigenvector?
 
Haorong Wu said:
Why ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must be a multiple of an ##A##-eigenvector?

It was shown that:
$$A(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle = (a + \beta)(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle$$
And that is the condition for ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## to be an eigenvector of ##A## with eigenvalue ##a + \beta##.

It may be even clearer if we let ##v = (B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle##, then it was shown that:
$$Av = (a + \beta)v$$
And we see that ##v## is indeed an eigenvector of ##A##.
 
PeroK said:
It was shown that:
$$A(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle = (a + \beta)(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle$$
And that is the condition for ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## to be an eigenvector of ##A## with eigenvalue ##a + \beta##.

It may be even clearer if we let ##v = (B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle##, then it was shown that:
$$Av = (a + \beta)v$$
And we see that ##v## is indeed an eigenvector of ##A##.
Thanks, PeroK.

I can see ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## is an eigenvector of ##A##. But, in order to let ##\left | a \right >## be an eigenvector of ##B##, ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must equal to ##\lambda \left | a \right >##. Otherwise, ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle =\left | b \right >## where ##\left |b \right > \neq \left |a \right >## would not give something like ##B \left | a \right > = k \left | a \right > ##.
 
Haorong Wu said:
Thanks, PeroK.

I can see ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## is an eigenvector of ##A##. But, in order to let ##\left | a \right >## be an eigenvector of ##B##, ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must equal to ##\lambda \left | a \right >##. Otherwise, ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle =\left | b \right >## where ##\left |b \right > \neq \left |a \right >## would not give something like ##B \left | a \right > = k \left | a \right > ##.
True. It's an eigenvector of ##A##. It's not necessarily an eigenvector of ##B##.
 
fresh_42 said:
Summary:: Normed, Banach and Hilbert spaces, topology, geometry, linear algebra, integration, flux.
Authors: Math_QED (MQ), Infrared (IR), Wrobel (WR), fresh_42 (FR).

Which is the smallest natural number n∈N0 such that there are no integers a,b∈Z with 3a3+b3=n?
So, we have ##3a^3=n−b^3##, that is ##n−b^3\equiv 0\ mod 3##. We know
$$b \equiv 0 \mod 3 \implies -b^3\equiv 0 ~~~~~~~(1) $$

$$b\equiv 1 \mod 3 \implies −b^3 \equiv −1~~~~~~~~~~ (2)$$

$$b\equiv 2\ mod3⟹b^3≡8⟹b^3≡2⟹−b^3≡−2 ~~~~~~~` (3)$$

And we know
$$n\equiv 0\ mod 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (i)$$

$$n\equiv 1\mod 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (ii)$$

$$n\equiv 2 \mod 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~(iii)$$
So, the condition ##n−b^3\equiv 0 \mod 3## can be fulfilled by any ##n## among (i), (ii) and (iii) (if b is allowed to be any integer). Because of this we have to move for inspection (trial and error method).
For ##n=0,1,2,3,4,5## we can easily find solutions. My claim is that the equation ##3a^3+b^3=6## doesn't have any integral solutions.
##{\large PROOF}##
$$b^3 = 6-3a^3$$

$$\implies b^3 \equiv 0 \mod 3$$
@fresh_42 schon seit, ##b^3\equiv 0## ist teilbar durch 3, das heißt$$\frac{b \times b \times b}{3} = M $$

Deshalb, 3 muss teilen b and hence ##b=3k## (I wrote German only for fun purpose not to offend you sir).
Now, substituting this value of b in our original equation we have :
$$3a^3 + 27k^3 = 6 $$

$$9k^3=2−a^3$$

$$⟹2−a^3\equiv 0 \mod 9$$

Let's check if that's possible (in every congruence that follows have modulus 9)

$$a\equiv 0⟹−a^3\equiv 0$$

$$a\equiv 1⟹−a^3\equiv −1$$

$$a \equiv 2 \implies a^3 \equiv 8

\implies -a^3 \equiv -8$$
$$a \equiv 3 \implies a^3 \equiv 27

\implies -a^3 \equiv 0$$

$$ a \equiv 4 \implies a^3 \equiv 64

\implies -a^3 \equiv -1$$

$$a\equiv 5 \implies a^3 \equiv 125

\implies -a^3 \equiv -8 $$

$$a \equiv 6 \implies a^3 \equiv 216

\implies -a^3 \equiv 0$$

$$ a\equiv 7 \implies a^3 \equiv 343

\implies -a^3 \equiv -1$$

$$a \equiv 8 \implies a^3 \equiv 512

\implies-a^3 \equiv -8$$

That is to say, we have only three possibilities for cubic residues:

$$−a^3\equiv 0$$

$$−a^3\equiv−1$$

$$−a^3\equiv−8 $$

And ##2\equiv 2\mod 9##. So, only possibilities:

$$2−a^3\equiv 2\mod 9$$

$$2−a^3\equiv 1\ mod 9$$

$$2−a^3\equiv−6\mod 9$$

Which means ##2−a^3\equiv 0 \mod 9## is not possible, hence there is no integral solution to ##a^3+9k^3=6##, which in turn means that
$$3a^3 +b^3 =6$$ have no integral solution
##{\tiny Maths} ~{\large QED}##
 
Last edited:
Adesh said:
So, we have 3a3=n−b3, that is n−b3≡0mod3. We know
$$
b \equiv 0 \mod 3 \implies -b^3\equiv 0 ~~~~~~~(1) $$
b≡1mod3⟹−b3≡−1 (2)
b≡2mod3⟹b3≡8⟹b3≡2⟹−b3≡−2 (3)
And we know

n≡0mod3 (i)
n≡1mod3 (ii)
$$n\equiv 2 \mod 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~(iii)
$$
So, the condition n−b3≡0mod3 can be fulfilled by any n among (i), (ii) and (iii) (if b is allowed to be any integer). Because of this we have to move for inspection (trial and error method).

For n=0,1,2,3,4,5 we can easily find solutions. My claim is that the equation 3a3+b3=6 doesn't have any integral solutions.

PROOF:
$$
b^3 = 6-3a^3 \
\implies b^3 \equiv 0 \mod 3
$$
@fresh_42 schon seit, b3−0 ist teilbar durch 3, das heißt
$$
\frac{b \times b \times b}{3} = M $$
Deshalb, 3 muss teilen b and hence b=3k (I wrote German only for fun purpose not to offend you sir).

Now, substituting this value of b in our original equation we have :
$$
3a^3 + 27k^3 = 6 $$
9k3=2−a3
⟹2−a3≡0mod9
Let's check if that's possible
a≡0⟹−a3≡0
a≡1⟹−a3≡−1
$$a \equiv 2 \implies a^3 \equiv 8 \implies
a^3 \equiv 2 \implies -a^3 \equiv -2$$

$$a \equiv 3 \implies a^3 \equiv 27 \implies
-a^3 \equiv 0$$
$$ a \equiv 4 \implies a^3 \equiv 64 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -1$$
$$a\equiv 5 \implies a^3 \equiv 125 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -8 $$
$$a \equiv 6 \implies a^3 \equiv 216 \implies
-a^3 \equiv 0$$
$$ a\equiv 7 \implies a^3 \equiv 343 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -1$$
$$a \equiv 8 \implies a^3 \equiv 512 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -8$$
That is to say, we have only three possibilities for cubic residues:
−a3≡0
−a3≡−1
−a3≡−8
And 2≡2mod9. So, only possibilities:
2−a3≡2mod9
2−a3≡1mod9
2−a3≡−6mod9
Which means 2−a3≡0mod9 is not possible, hence there is no integral solution to a3+9k3=6, which in turn means that
$$
3a^3 +b^3 =6$$ have no integral solution.

##{\tiny Maths_} ~{\large QED}
Can you either edit this properly, or say in words what you mean. I have difficulties to follow your reasoning.
See https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/
 
fresh_42 said:
Can you either edit this properly, or say in words what you mean. I have difficulties to follow your reasoning.
See https://www.physicsforums.com/help/latexhelp/
I really don't know what happened in actuality, but I have repaired everything.
 
Adesh said:
Which part? I write everything in Latex but I really don't know what has happened, I'm surprised.
Everything before
Adesh said:
So, we have 3a3=n−b3, that is n−b3≡0mod3. We know
$$
b \equiv 0 \mod 3 \implies -b^3\equiv 0 ~~~~~~~(1) $$
b≡1mod3⟹−b3≡−1 (2)
b≡2mod3⟹b3≡8⟹b3≡2⟹−b3≡−2 (3)
And we know

n≡0mod3 (i)
n≡1mod3 (ii)
$$n\equiv 2 \mod 3 ~~~~~~~~~~~~(iii)
$$
So, the condition n−b3≡0mod3 can be fulfilled by any n among (i), (ii) and (iii) (if b is allowed to be any integer). Because of this we have to move for inspection (trial and error method).

For n=0,1,2,3,4,5 we can easily find solutions. My claim is that the equation 3a3+b3=6 doesn't have any integral solutions.
here. But this isn't needed, so let's go further.
PROOF:
$$
b^3 = 6-3a^3 \
\implies b^3 \equiv 0 \mod 3
$$
@fresh_42 schon seit, b3−0 ist teilbar durch 3, das heißt
$$
\frac{b \times b \times b}{3} = M $$
Deshalb, 3 muss teilen b and hence b=3k (I wrote German only for fun purpose not to offend you sir).

Now, substituting this value of b in our original equation we have :
$$
3a^3 + 27k^3 = 6 $$
9k3=2−a3
⟹2−a3≡0mod9
Let's check if that's possible
Beside that the LaTeX code is broken, I also don't know what your modules are. You switch between modulo ##3,2,9## so how am I supposed to know which one you mean?
The correct notation is
$$
a \equiv b \mod n \Longleftrightarrow n\,|\,(a-b) \Longleftrightarrow a\equiv b (n)
$$
a≡0⟹−a3≡0
a≡1⟹−a3≡−1
So you need to write ##a\equiv 0 (9)## and ##a\equiv 1 (9)## if nine is the module you mean. However, ##a\equiv 1 (n)## implies ##a^3\equiv 1 (n)## for all ##n\in \mathbb{N} ##. This equals ##-1## only in case ##n=2##. How should I know that you are considering the remainders of division by two?
$$a \equiv 2 \implies a^3 \equiv 8 \implies
a^3 \equiv 2 \implies -a^3 \equiv -2$$

$$a \equiv 3 \implies a^3 \equiv 27 \implies
-a^3 \equiv 0$$
$$ a \equiv 4 \implies a^3 \equiv 64 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -1$$
$$a\equiv 5 \implies a^3 \equiv 125 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -8 $$
$$a \equiv 6 \implies a^3 \equiv 216 \implies
-a^3 \equiv 0$$
$$ a\equiv 7 \implies a^3 \equiv 343 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -1$$
$$a \equiv 8 \implies a^3 \equiv 512 \implies
-a^3 \equiv -8$$
That is to say, we have only three possibilities for cubic residues:
−a3≡0
−a3≡−1
−a3≡−8
And 2≡2mod9. So, only possibilities:
2−a3≡2mod9
2−a3≡1mod9
2−a3≡−6mod9
Which means 2−a3≡0mod9 is not possible, hence there is no integral solution to a3+9k3=6, which in turn means that
$$
3a^3 +b^3 =6$$ have no integral solution.

##{\tiny Maths_} ~{\large QED}
 
fresh_42 said:
So you need to write a≡0(9) and a≡1(9) if nine is the module you mean. However, a≡1(n) implies a3≡1(n) for all n∈N. This equals −1 only in case n=2. How should I know that you are considering the remainders of division by two?
(Please tell me why when I quote some post the latex code doesn't get quoted rather the mathematical symbols get copied).

Well, for getting the minus sign I'm using this fact
$$a \equiv b \mod n $$
$$-1 \equiv -1 \mod n$$

Now, multiplying corresponding sides of congruences (multiplication preserves the congruency), so we have
$$
-a \equiv - b \mod n
$$
 
Adesh said:
(Please tell me why when I quote some post the latex code doesn't get quoted rather the mathematical symbols get copied).
This is a bug when you use "quote".
Well, for getting the minus sign I'm using this fact
$$a \equiv b \mod n $$
$$-1 \equiv -1 \mod n$$

Now, multiplying corresponding sides of congruences (multiplication preserves the congruency), so we have
$$
-a \equiv - b \mod n
$$
Sorry, I've overseen the minus sign. But this doesn't change the fact that you need to note the module with every ##\equiv## sign.
 
fresh_42 said:
This is a bug when you use "quote".

Sorry, I've overseen the minus sign. But this doesn't change the fact that you need to note the module with every ##\equiv## sign.
I have made corresponding repairs in my solution, sorry for disturbance caused.
 
Adesh said:
Let's check if that's possible (in every congruence that follows have modulus 9)

$$a\equiv 0⟹−a^3\equiv 0$$

$$a\equiv 1⟹−a^3\equiv −1$$

$$a \equiv 2 \implies a^3 \equiv 8

\implies a^3 \equiv 2 \implies -a^3 \equiv -2$$
If ##a^3\equiv 8 (9)## then ##a^3 \not\equiv 2 (9)##.

Hint: From ##2=a^3+9k^3## continue by considering the equation modulo ##3##. This is shorter and easier.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adesh
fresh_42 said:
If ##a^3\equiv 8 (9)## then ##a^3 \not\equiv 2 (9)##.

Hint: From ##2=a^3+9k^3## continue by considering the equation modulo ##3##. This is shorter and easier.
I'm editing my post every time you're pointing out an error, is that okay or should I consider reposting?

I will surely solve it by your hint also.
 
Adesh said:
I'm editing my post every time you're pointing out an error, is that okay or should I consider reposting?

I will surely solve it my your hint also.
Repost it. That's better.
You were here:

Assume there is a solution ##6=3a^3+b^3.##
Then ##0\equiv b^3 \,(3)## and ##b=3k##, i.e. ##6=3a^3+27k^3## or ##2=a^3+9k^3##.
This means ##a^3\equiv 2\,(3)##.

Now go ahead and examine how ##a## must look like so that is possible.
 
fresh_42 said:
Now go ahead and examine how a must look like so that is possible.
I get ##a^3 = 3m +2##.
 
fresh_42 said:
Yes, but which ##a## have this shape? ##a## cannot be divisible by three, can it have the remainder ##1## by division by ##3##?
$$a^3 \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
$$ 8\equiv 2 \mod 3$$
By Symmetry we have
$$ a^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 3$$
$$ a \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
That is to say, ##a = 3k +2 ##.
 
Adesh said:
$$a^3 \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
$$ 8\equiv 2 \mod 3$$
By Symmetry transitivity we have
$$ a^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 3$$
$$ a \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
Why is this? E.g. ##5^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 13## but ##5\not\equiv 2 \mod 13##.
You cannot take the root in general. Why is it true here?
That is to say, ##a = 3k +2 ##.
And now you can go back: Take ##a^3=(3m+2)^3= \ldots## and consider it modulo ##9##.
Btw., you shouldn't take the same letter (##k##) for two different numbers. We already used ##k##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi and Adesh
Haorong Wu said:
I do not understand this statement
strangerep said:
the vector ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must be a multiple of an ##A##-eigenvector

Why ##(B+ a\alpha/\beta) |a\rangle## must be a multiple of an ##A##-eigenvector?
The paragraph in which I wrote the above was misleading at best, so I will go back a put a strike through it.

I suggest you ignore that paragraph and proceed directly to the 2nd part of the solution given first by PeroK, and later by me in a different form.
 
strangerep said:
The paragraph in which I wrote the above was misleading at best, so I will go back a put a strike through it.

I suggest you ignore that paragraph and proceed directly to the 2nd part of the solution given first by PeroK, and later by me in a different form.

Thanks, strangerep.
 
fresh_42 said:
Why is this? E.g. ##5^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 13## but ##5\not\equiv 2 \mod 13##.
You cannot take the root in general. Why is it true here?

And now you can go back: Take ##a^3=(3m+2)^3= \ldots## and consider it modulo ##9##.
Btw., you shouldn't take the same letter (##k##) for two different numbers. We already used ##k##.
Okay Herr,
$$ a^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 3 ~~~~~(1) $$
$$a \equiv 2 \mod 3 ~~~~~~~ (2)$$
(1) is given and (2) is possible, knowing that if (2) is given we can get (1), therefore (I’m not taking cubic root, I just reasoned it out, maybe not very nicely)
$$ a \equiv 2 \mod 3$$
So, for an integer ##t## we have ##a = 3t +2 ##. Plugging this value in the Eqaution
$$ a^3 = 2-9m^3 $$
We get
$$ 27 t^3 +8 + 54t^2 +36t = 2-9m^3$$
$$27t^3 +6 +54t^2 +36t =-9m^3$$
Well, that means
$$ 27t^3 + 54t^2 +36t +6 \equiv 0 \mod 9$$
$$ 27t^3 +54t^2 +36t \equiv -6 \mod 9$$
But we know that ##27t^3 +54t^2 +36t \equiv 0 \mod 9##, hence the contradiction and therefore the equation doesn’t have any integral solution.
 
Adesh said:
Okay Herr,
$$ a^3 \equiv 2^3 \mod 3 ~~~~~(1) $$
$$a \equiv 2 \mod 3 ~~~~~~~ (2)$$
(1) is given and (2) is possible, knowing that if (2) is given we can get (1), therefore (I’m not taking cubic root, I just reasoned it out, maybe not very nicely)
This is not logical. The fact that ##a\equiv 2\mod 3## is possible, does not mean that it is true. You have to consider the possible cases! There are only three possible cases modulo ##3##, the remainders ##0,1,2##. Hence you can check them:
Case ##1##: if ##a\equiv 0 \mod 3 \text{ then } a^3 \equiv ... \mod 3##
Case ##2##: if ##a\equiv 1 \mod 3 \text{ then } a^3 \equiv ... \mod 3##
Case ##3##: if ##a\equiv 2 \mod 3 \text{ then } a^3 \equiv ... \mod 3##

The rest is ok, although a bit lengthy. From ##27t^3+ 8+54t^2+36t=2-9m^3## you can directly conclude ##8\equiv 2 \mod 9## which is the desired contradiction.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Delta2 and Adesh
Some thoughts, but potentially a dead-end. Don't know how to make use of completeness of [itex]X[/itex].
Let [itex]A:X\to Y[/itex] be linear. Assume
[tex] B:Y'\to X',\quad g\mapsto g\circ A[/tex]
is well-defined. Take [itex]x_n\in X,n\in\mathbb N,[/itex] such that [itex]x_n\to 0[/itex]. Fix [itex]g\in Y'[/itex], then
[tex] (Bg)(x_n) = g(Ax_n),\quad n\in\mathbb N.[/tex]
Since [itex]g\circ A[/itex] is bounded, we have [itex]|g(Ax_n)| \leq M_g\|x_n\|\to 0[/itex]. Thus
[tex] \forall g\in Y',\quad \lim g(Ax_n) = 0.[/tex]
If [itex]\lim Ax_n[/itex] exists, then we can switch [itex]\lim[/itex] and [itex]g[/itex]. Since [itex]g[/itex] is arbitrary, it must hold that [itex]\lim Ax_n = 0[/itex]. Thus, [itex]A[/itex] would be continuous at [itex]0[/itex]. Equivalently, [itex]A[/itex] would be bounded.

..but why would [itex]\lim Ax_n[/itex] have to exist?
 
Last edited:
I hope I have the definition right. [itex]A\subseteq X[/itex] of a normed space is weakly bounded if [itex]\sup _{x\in A} |x^*(x)|<\infty[/itex] for every [itex]x^* \in X^*[/itex].
So, we could show [itex]\{Ax \mid x\in X\}\subseteq Y[/itex] is bounded. Fix [itex]g\in Y'[/itex], then
[tex] \sup _{x\in X} |g(Ax)| < \infty[/tex]
because by assumption [itex]Y'\to X',\ g\mapsto g\circ A,[/itex] is well-defined i.e [itex]g\circ A[/itex] is bounded.

But this is not right. [itex]\|Ax\| \leq K[/itex] doesn't imply [itex]\|Ax\| \leq L\|x\|[/itex].
I am short-circuiting. Something somewhere is false. My functional analysis is a pile of garbage..
 
nuuskur said:
My functional analysis is a pile of garbage..
Heh, I once heard a description of FA as being a "pile of abstract nonsense". :olduhh: