wu :: forums
wu :: forums - inequality

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Aug 8th, 2022, 4:25pm

RIDDLES SITE WRITE MATH! Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members Login Login Register Register
   wu :: forums
   riddles
   putnam exam (pure math)
(Moderators: Icarus, william wu, towr, Eigenray, Grimbal, SMQ)
   inequality
« Previous topic | Next topic »
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: inequality  (Read 557 times)
anonymous
Guest

Email

inequality  
« on: Jun 16th, 2003, 5:50pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Let a1 be a real number such that 0 < a1 < 1
Define an+1=(an)2 for n=1,2,3,...
 
Prove that
sum_{n=1}^{infinity} (an-an+1)an+2 < 1/3
 
hint: geometric progression
IP Logged
william wu
wu::riddles Administrator
*****





   
WWW

Gender: male
Posts: 1291
Re: inequality  
« Reply #1 on: Jun 17th, 2003, 9:43pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Didn't really get anywhere with this one, aside from the following perhaps trivial observations:
 
IP Logged


[ wu ] : http://wuriddles.com / http://forums.wuriddles.com
James Fingas
Uberpuzzler
*****





   
Email

Gender: male
Posts: 949
Re: inequality  
« Reply #2 on: Jun 19th, 2003, 9:51am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The exact upper bound is 0.263036536, based on studying the sumi=-inf..inf(ai5-ai6) with a1 on the interval [0.52/3..0.54/3]. The maximum happens exactly when a1=0.5.
 
UPDATE: whoops! no it's not. The sum is a little larger for a1=0.5134 (not the exact maximal value). The actual sum is roughly the same.
 
ADDED: consider the sequence a1,a16/5,a2,a26/5,a 3,...
You can see that this is a monotone decreasing function, and therefore splits the interval [0,1] into alternating bands. Half are included in the sum, and half aren't.
« Last Edit: Jun 19th, 2003, 10:19am by James Fingas » IP Logged

Doc, I'm addicted to advice! What should I do?
towr
wu::riddles Moderator
Uberpuzzler
*****



Some people are average, some are just mean.

   


Gender: male
Posts: 13730
Re: inequality  
« Reply #3 on: Jun 19th, 2003, 12:51pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I get the maximum very close to 1
(at least higher than 5/6)
 
which makes sense to me, since every term a2^(n-1)*5 - a2^(n-1)*6 has a maximum for a = (5/6)(1/2)^(n-1)
which gets ever closer to 1 for increasing n.
 
the maximum is the same for all terms though, so summing those won't give an upper limit..
« Last Edit: Jun 19th, 2003, 1:03pm by towr » IP Logged

Wikipedia, Google, Mathworld, Integer sequence DB
James Fingas
Uberpuzzler
*****





   
Email

Gender: male
Posts: 949
Re: inequality  
« Reply #4 on: Jun 20th, 2003, 9:34am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

towr,
 
I think you're saying that the sum generally gets larger as a1 goes closer to 1. That is true, but I am considering the two-sided infinite sum (from -inf to inf), which effectively takes the limit as you go nearer and nearer to 1. For the two-sided infinite sum, choosing a1=0.25 is equivalent to choosing a1=0.0625 or a1=0.5, so I restricted my considerations to a band around 0.5, from 0.54/3 to 0.52/3.
 
The value for the whole sum ranges from 0.263032 to 0.263037 as far as my analysis can tell, depending on what you pick for a1. The maximum value for the two-sided infinite sum seems to occur for a1 around 0.515, but I haven't found a reason why.
« Last Edit: Jun 20th, 2003, 9:36am by James Fingas » IP Logged

Doc, I'm addicted to advice! What should I do?
anonymous
Guest

Email

Re: inequality  
« Reply #5 on: Jun 20th, 2003, 2:41pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Does anyone wants me to post the proof?
 
here's another hint: telescopic sum
IP Logged
James Fingas
Uberpuzzler
*****





   
Email

Gender: male
Posts: 949
Re: inequality  
« Reply #6 on: Jun 23rd, 2003, 10:36am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The only bounding geometric sum that I've tried has been sumi=1..infa5*i-a6*i, but this doesn't do well as a gets near 1. I proved that if you define bi = a1i, then sumi=1..inf(bi - bi+1)*bi+2 was bounded less than 1/2, but this doesn't necessarily mean anything because the relationship between bi and bi+1 isn't the same as the relationship between ai and ai+1.
 
I don't have a good idea for a telescoping sum, although that would be nice.
 
Well I just figured out a way to brute-force it. We know that the two-sided infinite sums are the same for all a1 that are the same up to squaring a number of times. We also know that the sum is less than a15 plus (1-a1). So I calculated the first three terms of the sum, then replaced the rest of the sum with a140, added (1-a1), and found that the result was less than 1/3 for a1 in the range 0.8 to 0.9. Since you can map all two-sided infinite sums into this range, all such sums add to less than 1/3. The one-sided sums are always smaller than the two-sided sums. QED (but not very satisfying).
IP Logged

Doc, I'm addicted to advice! What should I do?
Pages: 1  Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4!
Forum software copyright 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board