Must There Be Two Years on a River Bank with the Same Temperature?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chaoseverlasting
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    River Temperature
chaoseverlasting
Messages
1,050
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement


This is a question I had in a mathematics quiz I participated in today.

The river bank of a river on the west coast is under observation perfectly. Suppose the temperature variation for the last one hundred years is known absolutely. The temperature now is exactly as it was 2007 years ago. Must there be at least one pair of years, separated by one year, which have the exact same temperature?


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution



I said yes as I thought the temperature change during a year would be a periodic function with period one (year). How could I prove or disprove it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The other interpretation is that "temperature" means "yearly average."
 
If you can't make that assumption, how would you prove/disprove it? I was thinking of something along the rolle's or langrange's theorem assuming that the temperature is a continuous non monotonous function.

Even if its not periodic, the fact the temperature was the same 2007 years ago satisfies one condition of the rolle's theorem, therefore atleast one point must exist where f'(t)=0 (there should be many many points like that because of the temperature fluctuations), but how do you prove that there must be a pair of years with the same temperature one year apart?
 
If temp. is a periodic function with constant yearly average, then it is kind of an absurd question. Either the question is missing information or it is relying on material that was covered in class that I am not privy to.

Otherwise, the answer may be either yes or no depending on the assumptions one makes.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
26
Views
6K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
56
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
4K
Back
Top