What is the Proof for the Floor Function Challenge II Involving Primes?

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter anemone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Challenge Function
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a mathematical challenge involving the floor function and prime numbers. Participants are tasked with proving a specific equation that relates the floor function of fractions involving two different primes.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a proof involving the floor function of fractions of two different primes, stating that the sum of these floor functions equals a specific formula.
  • Another participant expresses admiration for the solution provided and indicates they have an alternative approach to the problem that they plan to share later.
  • A third participant references a previous discussion related to number theory, suggesting a connection to broader concepts in the field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion includes multiple viewpoints, with at least one alternative approach suggested, indicating that there is no consensus on a single solution or method at this time.

Contextual Notes

Participants have not yet resolved the problem, and there may be differing assumptions or interpretations of the floor function and its application to prime numbers.

anemone
Gold Member
MHB
POTW Director
Messages
3,851
Reaction score
115
Let $a$ and $b$ be two different primes. Prove that
$\displaystyle\left\lfloor\dfrac{a}{b} \right\rfloor+\left\lfloor\dfrac{2a}{b} \right\rfloor+\left\lfloor\dfrac{3a}{b} \right\rfloor+\cdots+\left\lfloor\dfrac{(b-1)a}{b} \right\rfloor=\dfrac{(a-1)(b-1)}{2}$.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
For every $k \in \{1,2,\ldots,b-1\}$, $ka$ is not divisible by $b$ (or else $b$ divides $k$, which cannot happen). So for fixed $k$,

$\displaystyle \frac{ka}{b} - 1 < \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor < \frac{ka}{b}$,

$\displaystyle \frac{(b-k)a}{b} - 1 < \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor < \frac{(b-k)a}{b}$.

Adding the two inequalities, we get

$\displaystyle a - 2 < \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor < a$.

This forces

$\displaystyle \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor = a - 1$

Therefore

$\displaystyle \left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{2a}{b}\right\rfloor + \cdots + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor$

$\displaystyle = \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2} + \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{2a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-2)a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2} + \cdots + \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2}$

$\displaystyle = \frac{a-1}{2} + \frac{a-1}{2} + \cdots + \frac{a-1}{2} (b-1\; \text{times})$

$\displaystyle = \frac{(a-1)(b-1)}{2}$.
 
Euge said:
For every $k \in \{1,2,\ldots,b-1\}$, $ka$ is not divisible by $b$ (or else $b$ divides $k$, which cannot happen). So for fixed $k$,

$\displaystyle \frac{ka}{b} - 1 < \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor < \frac{ka}{b}$,

$\displaystyle \frac{(b-k)a}{b} - 1 < \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor < \frac{(b-k)a}{b}$.

Adding the two inequalities, we get

$\displaystyle a - 2 < \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor < a$.

This forces

$\displaystyle \left\lfloor\frac{ka}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-k)a}{b}\right\rfloor = a - 1$

Therefore

$\displaystyle \left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{2a}{b}\right\rfloor + \cdots + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor$

$\displaystyle = \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2} + \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{2a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{(b-2)a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2} + \cdots + \dfrac{\left\lfloor\frac{(b-1)a}{b}\right\rfloor + \left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor}{2}$

$\displaystyle = \frac{a-1}{2} + \frac{a-1}{2} + \cdots + \frac{a-1}{2} (b-1\; \text{times})$

$\displaystyle = \frac{(a-1)(b-1)}{2}$.

Wow...what terrific solution, so impressively laid out...well done, Euge! And thanks for participating.:)

I have at hand a solution that tackles the problem entirely differently and I would post it days later, in case there are more members want to play with this problem.
 
Solution of other:

The statement involves two independent variables, $a$ and $b$ and $\dfrac{a}{b},\,\dfrac{2a}{b},\,\dfrac{3a}{b},\cdots,$ respectively. We might want to approach it using geometry approach.

Consider the case $a=5$ and $b=7$. The points $(k,\,\dfrac{5k}{7})$ where $k=1,\,2,\,\cdots,\,6$ each lie on the line $y=\dfrac{5k}{7}$ and $\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^6\left\lfloor\dfrac{5k}{7} \right\rfloor$ equals the number of lattice points interior to the triangle with vertices $(0,\,0)$, $(7,\,0)$ and $(7,\,5)$. By symmetry, this number is one-half the number of lattice points in the rectangle with vertices $(0,\,0)$, $(0,\,5)$, $(7,\,0)$ and $(7,\,5)$. There are $4\times 6=24$ lattice points in that rectangle, which means the triangle with vertices $(0,\,0)$, $(7,\,0)$ and $(7,\,5)$ contains 12 interior lattice points.

The same goes through in the general case. The condition that $a$ and $b$ have no common factor assures us that none of the lattice points in the interior of the rectangle will fall on the line $y=\dfrac{ax}{b}$. Thus,

$\displaystyle \sum_{k=1}^{b-1}\left\lfloor\dfrac{ka}{b} \right\rfloor=\dfrac{\text{total number of lattice poins in the interior of the rectangle}}{2}=\frac{(a-1)(b-1)}{2}$.
 
Interestingly done anemone. Reminds me of a post I made long ago in http://mathhelpboards.com/number-theory-27/quadratic-reciprocity-9722.html at the number theory forum.
 

Similar threads

Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K