random stuff
by math154, Dec 15, 2013, 7:43 AM
I should stop procrastinating on finals studying. Anyway, here are some nice problems from Putnam seminar this semester... (A lot of these are probably Putnam problems even if I didn't label them as such.)
1. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Congruences and Divisibility) Consider
with
. Suppose that
. Prove or disprove that
for all
.
Click to reveal hidden text
2. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Abstract Algebra) Let
be a noncommutative ring with identity. Show that if an element
has more than one right inverse, then
has infinitely many right inverses.
Click to reveal hidden text
3. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, ``Hidden'' Independence and Uniformity) A snake on the
chessboard is a nonempty subset
of the squares of the board obtained as follows: Start at one of the squares and continue walking one step up or to the right, stopping at any time. The squares visited are the squares of the snake. Find the total number of ways to cover an
chessboard with disjoint snakes.
Click to reveal hidden text
4. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Generating Functions; Putnam 1948 A6) Show that![\[ x + \frac23 x^3 + \frac23\frac45 x^5 + \frac23\frac45\frac67 x^7 + \cdots = \frac{\sin^{-1}{x}}{\sqrt{1-x^2}}. \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/0/4/4/044e0c7ac640ca3d433de716fdc354e033502aa1.png)
Click to reveal hidden text
5. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Probability) Choose
points
at random from the unit interval
. Let
be the probability that
for all
. Compute the generating function
.
Click to reveal hidden text
6. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Analysis; Putnam 1996 B6) Let
be the vertices of a convex polygon which contains the origin in its interior. Prove that there exist positive reals
such that
.
Click to reveal hidden text
7. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Analysis; Putnam 1999 A5) Prove that there is a constant
such that for every polynomial
of degree
,
.
Click to reveal hidden text
8. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Recurrences; Putnam 1997 A6) For a positive integer
and any real number
, define
recursively by
,
, and for
,
Fix
and then take
to be the largest value for which
. Find
in terms of
and
,
.
Click to reveal hidden text
9. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Polynomials; Putnam 1956 B7?) The nonconstant polynomials
and
with complex coefficients have the same set of numbers for their zeros but possibly different multiplicities. The same is true of the polynomials
and
. Prove that
.
Click to reveal hidden text
1. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Congruences and Divisibility) Consider
![$f(x) = a_0+a_1x+\cdots\in\mathbb{Z}[[x]]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/8/f/98fc63aef1bb3cafef1cdb5a6955dc61e83d7204.png)

![$f'(x)f(x)^{-1} \in \mathbb{Z}[[x]]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/1/0/110455880d6f898bbe2cf590f19d41be521f989d.png)


Click to reveal hidden text
See my Math StackExchange post for a solution and questions about potential alternative approaches.
2. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Abstract Algebra) Let



Click to reveal hidden text
%http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/156238/kaplanskys-theorem-of-infinitely-many-right-inverses-in-monoids
%http://www.jams.or.jp/scm/contents/Vol-9-5/9-48.pdf
Assume for the sake of contradiction that
has finitely many right inverses, which form the set
, and fix some
. If
denotes
, then
has the same (finite) size as
, which has at least two elements by assumption.
It's clear that
. In particular,
. But
, so
and we deduce
.
Now
. Yet
implies
, whence
![\[ 0 = (1-y_0x)(1-y_0x) = 1-y_0x-y_0x+y_0xy_0x = 1-y_0x-y_0x+y_0 1 x = 1-y_0x. \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/5/a/b/5ab13dae46c2bdc4ba2130e4c1e8759a17b91045.png)
Finally, we see that
, so
has size
, contradiction.
%we might try to prove that
from
.
%http://www.jams.or.jp/scm/contents/Vol-9-5/9-48.pdf
Assume for the sake of contradiction that







It's clear that





Now



![\[ 0 = (1-y_0x)(1-y_0x) = 1-y_0x-y_0x+y_0xy_0x = 1-y_0x-y_0x+y_0 1 x = 1-y_0x. \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/5/a/b/5ab13dae46c2bdc4ba2130e4c1e8759a17b91045.png)
Finally, we see that



%we might try to prove that


3. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, ``Hidden'' Independence and Uniformity) A snake on the



Click to reveal hidden text
Place the square in the lattice grid
in the Cartesian plane.
First suppose we have a snake partition. For each point
, define
as follows: if
is end of a snake, then set
; otherwise, let
be the next point in the snake (either
or
).
Then the only restriction on
is that
for any two points
along the same ``main'' diagonal. Indeed, for any such
with
for all
, we get a unique snake partition by drawing snakes according to the rules
. (The snakes will start at the non-invertible points of
.)
Now let
denote the number of valid
, restricted to the diagonal
, for
. Then the total number of snake partitions of
is just
.
Clearly
, and by symmetry (consider rotating everything by
),
for
. Now fix
, and represent
by the set of
and
tiles corresponding to
, for
, and
for any non-invertible square with
. Then the restriction for valid
is equivalent to having no two of these tiles intersect. Furthermore, any tile representation of
(not necessarily valid) covers the points with
as well as both the invertible and non-invertiible points with
, so
is valid \ifff{} it corresponds to a domino tiling of the union of the
- and
-main diagonals!
It immediately follows that
, the number of ways to tile a
grid with
and
blocks. We conclude that the number of snake partitions of
is
.
\textbf{Comment.} We can think of
as really just drawing arrows between successive points in the snakes.
\textbf{Comment.} We can easily generalize to
chessboards. When
, there will just be a few main diagonals of the same length in the middle, but we still get a product of Fibonacci numbers.

First suppose we have a snake partition. For each point







Then the only restriction on








Now let






Clearly



















It immediately follows that






\textbf{Comment.} We can think of

\textbf{Comment.} We can easily generalize to


4. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Generating Functions; Putnam 1948 A6) Show that
![\[ x + \frac23 x^3 + \frac23\frac45 x^5 + \frac23\frac45\frac67 x^7 + \cdots = \frac{\sin^{-1}{x}}{\sqrt{1-x^2}}. \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/0/4/4/044e0c7ac640ca3d433de716fdc354e033502aa1.png)
Click to reveal hidden text
This is probably trivialized by Wilf-Zeilberger pairs, but I haven't yet taken the time to understand how those work.
Let
. Then
, so differentiating yields
, or
.
The rest is standard. We have
. From
and
, we conclude that
![\[ G(x)\sqrt{1-x^2} = \int_0^x \frac{1}{1-t^2}\sqrt{1-t^2}\;dt = \sin^{-1}{x}, \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/7/a/4/7a469e8f2d208e9b3cfaf2b3daef35114e565b21.png)
as desired.
\textbf{Comment.} Since
![\[ (\sin^{-1}{x})' = (1-x^2)^{-1/2} = \sum_{k\ge0}\binom{-1/2}{k}(-x^2)^k = \sum_{k\ge0}(-1)^k\frac{(2k-1)!!}{2^k k!}(-1)^k x^{2k} = \sum_{k\ge0}\frac{(2k-1)!!}{2^k k!}x^{2k}, \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/d/f/1dfeb788fd8faa485b583c469bf305f696b84641.png)
and
, we have
![\[ \sin^{-1}{x}(1-x^2)^{-1/2} = \sum_{a\ge0}\frac{(2a-1)!!}{(2a+1)2^a a!}x^{2a+1}\sum_{b\ge0}\frac{(2b-1)!!}{2^b b!}x^{2b} = \sum_{n\ge0}x^{2n+1}\sum_{a+b=n}\frac{(2a-1)!!(2b-1)!!}{2^n(2a+1)a!b!}. \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/5/7/b57cee32944d98afb39dbda4098b487d127907ca.png)
Since
, this problem establishes the identity
.
Let


![$G'(x) - 1 = x[G(x) + xG'(x)]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/d/c/1dcce0d68b41330be4b006ca946ecadead78b938.png)

The rest is standard. We have



![\[ G(x)\sqrt{1-x^2} = \int_0^x \frac{1}{1-t^2}\sqrt{1-t^2}\;dt = \sin^{-1}{x}, \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/7/a/4/7a469e8f2d208e9b3cfaf2b3daef35114e565b21.png)
as desired.
\textbf{Comment.} Since
![\[ (\sin^{-1}{x})' = (1-x^2)^{-1/2} = \sum_{k\ge0}\binom{-1/2}{k}(-x^2)^k = \sum_{k\ge0}(-1)^k\frac{(2k-1)!!}{2^k k!}(-1)^k x^{2k} = \sum_{k\ge0}\frac{(2k-1)!!}{2^k k!}x^{2k}, \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/d/f/1dfeb788fd8faa485b583c469bf305f696b84641.png)
and

![\[ \sin^{-1}{x}(1-x^2)^{-1/2} = \sum_{a\ge0}\frac{(2a-1)!!}{(2a+1)2^a a!}x^{2a+1}\sum_{b\ge0}\frac{(2b-1)!!}{2^b b!}x^{2b} = \sum_{n\ge0}x^{2n+1}\sum_{a+b=n}\frac{(2a-1)!!(2b-1)!!}{2^n(2a+1)a!b!}. \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/5/7/b57cee32944d98afb39dbda4098b487d127907ca.png)
Since


5. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Probability) Choose


![$[0,1]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/e/8/6/e861e10e1c19918756b9c8b7717684593c63aeb8.png)




Click to reveal hidden text
Define
, so that
is a polynomial with constant term
. Then
and for
,
. (We may vacuously define
.)
Thus we may uniquely determine
from
(for
) using
and
. Differentiating once more (for
), we get
.
If
, then
suggests trying
for some (formal) power series
. Now from
, we get
, and from
we get
, yielding
.
All of this is reversible, so
must equal
, and we conclude
.







Thus we may uniquely determine







If









All of this is reversible, so



6. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Analysis; Putnam 1996 B6) Let



Click to reveal hidden text
Let
denote our convex
-gon. Define
.
Fix
, and observe that if
for some
, then
for each
. But because
lies in the \emph{interior}
, there exists
(indpendent of
) such that each of the four points
lies in
as well, so by taking suitable weighted geometric means of the
, we obtain
and
. Thus
and
.
Yet by the extreme value theorem,
attains a minimum on the compact set
, say at
, where
means
cannot lie on the boundary of
. Thus
, a differentiable function on
, has a local (actually, a global) minimum at
, and we conclude that
, so we're done.



Fix















![$(u,v)\in[C^{-1/\epsilon},C^{1/\epsilon}]^2$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/a/0/b/a0b60420867ff42413d5cf37e762cc82576da543.png)
Yet by the extreme value theorem,

![$S = [\frac12 n^{-1/\epsilon},2n^{1/\epsilon}]^2$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/6/c/1/6c1cbae452cd8f9f05138af04bb4c56edb26581a.png)








7. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Analysis; Putnam 1999 A5) Prove that there is a constant




Click to reveal hidden text
\begin{lem*}
For fixed $z\in\C$ and
, the set
of
satisfying
is contained in an interval of length at most
.
\end{lem*}
\begin{proof}
If
, then
, so
. Clearly we have no solutions for
.
If
,
must lie in an interval of length
.
Otherwise, if
, then
has magnitude at least
and the same sign as
, and must therefore lie in either
or
, which both have length
.
\end{proof}
Let
and write
for some complex numbers
. Let
. By the lemma, the set of
satisfying
lies in a union of intervals of total length at most
, so
, allowing us to take
.
For fixed $z\in\C$ and


![$x\in[-1,1]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/5/2/e/52ebe6de79419fad5a4cc599c58421f8140a8e18.png)


\end{lem*}
\begin{proof}
If




If



Otherwise, if




![$[-1,-(1-\epsilon)]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/0/6/3/06351d9c5991c9e9fbcda93c0f7ca48e28924c59.png)
![$[1-\epsilon,1]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/3/6/9/369c3fea031c4c25f1c1994813e6f8dcca48b5d8.png)

\end{proof}
Let




![$x\in[-1,1]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/5/2/e/52ebe6de79419fad5a4cc599c58421f8140a8e18.png)




8. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Recurrences; Putnam 1997 A6) For a positive integer






![\[ x_{k+2} = \frac{cx_{k+1} - (n-k)x_k}{k+1}. \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/d/8/d/d8dc064aea34a798099ffe3046c4a148da1fe477.png)







Click to reveal hidden text
Fix
, and suppose
; then
, so
for
.
Let
, so
, and
![\[ (c-(n-1)t)f(t) = \sum_{k\ge0}cx_{k+1}t^k - (n-1)x_k t^k = \sum_{k\ge0} (k+1)x_{k+2}t^k - (k-1)x_k t^k = (1 - t^2)f'(t). \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/5/9/959c00b484ca60e4523ca022ab77ec92c624c6dc.png)
But if
is a root of
with multiplicity
, then it's a root of
with multiplicity
, and so
. Writing
(since
), we obtain
. Hence
, with equality \ifff
, so when
is maximal (such that
), we have
, so
for
.





Let


![\[ (c-(n-1)t)f(t) = \sum_{k\ge0}cx_{k+1}t^k - (n-1)x_k t^k = \sum_{k\ge0} (k+1)x_{k+2}t^k - (k-1)x_k t^k = (1 - t^2)f'(t). \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/5/9/959c00b484ca60e4523ca022ab77ec92c624c6dc.png)
But if
















9. (MIT Problem Solving Seminar, Polynomials; Putnam 1956 B7?) The nonconstant polynomials





Click to reveal hidden text
%(On the original Exam, the assumption that
and
are nonconstant was inadvertently omitted.)
%\item Let
be the set of roots (without multiplicity) of a polynomial
. Are there two distinct polynomials
such that
and
.
Go by contradiction and suppose for some
and complex
,
![\[ P(x) = c(x-b_1)^{s_1}\cdots(x-b_n)^{s_n};\qquad P(x)+1 = c(x-a_1)^{r_1} \cdots (x-a_m)^{r_m} \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/7/b/1/7b17a2a207df436c1515d85f09edd843cda02fe9.png)
and
![\[ Q(x) = d(x-b_1)^{u_1} \cdots (x-b_n)^{u_n};\qquad Q(x)+1 = d(x-a_1)^{t_1} \cdots (x-a_m)^{t_m} \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/7/7/177a79b36bc85b7dfbd269d576b13743ae721ed8.png)
for constants
and positive integers
with
and
.
The sets
and
must be disjoint (
cannot share any roots), so differentiating
shows that
![\[ (x-b_1)^{s_1-1}\cdots(x-b_n)^{s_n-1}(x-a_1)^{r_1-1}\cdots(x-a_m)^{r_m-1} \mid P' = (P+1)'. \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/c/e/9ce2661a48b7b0f4faa63808e7418be6fe329196.png)
Thus
, and similarly we have
.
On the other hand,
![\[ (x-b_1)\cdots(x-b_n)(x-a_1)\cdots(x-a_m)\mid P-Q = (P+1)-(Q+1) \ne0 \]](//latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/9/9/1994327ea3ef95e81d01b8882157a519030638e7.png)
forces
, a clear contradiction.
%Equivalent wording by Alex Zhu: Let
and
be the sets of roots of
and
, respectively, and let
. Then
has at least
roots from
and at least
from


%\item Let

![$f\in\mathbb{C}[x]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/4/c/7/4c7af160dbe982332c129a4220f16366307a9ff7.png)
![$P,Q\in\mathbb{C}[x]$](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/b/1/2/b127fe9cd6bbd70dcc23ac527bea2eea34e95fee.png)


Go by contradiction and suppose for some


![\[ P(x) = c(x-b_1)^{s_1}\cdots(x-b_n)^{s_n};\qquad P(x)+1 = c(x-a_1)^{r_1} \cdots (x-a_m)^{r_m} \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/7/b/1/7b17a2a207df436c1515d85f09edd843cda02fe9.png)
and
![\[ Q(x) = d(x-b_1)^{u_1} \cdots (x-b_n)^{u_n};\qquad Q(x)+1 = d(x-a_1)^{t_1} \cdots (x-a_m)^{t_m} \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/7/7/177a79b36bc85b7dfbd269d576b13743ae721ed8.png)
for constants




The sets




![\[ (x-b_1)^{s_1-1}\cdots(x-b_n)^{s_n-1}(x-a_1)^{r_1-1}\cdots(x-a_m)^{r_m-1} \mid P' = (P+1)'. \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/9/c/e/9ce2661a48b7b0f4faa63808e7418be6fe329196.png)
Thus


On the other hand,
![\[ (x-b_1)\cdots(x-b_n)(x-a_1)\cdots(x-a_m)\mid P-Q = (P+1)-(Q+1) \ne0 \]](http://latex.artofproblemsolving.com/1/9/9/1994327ea3ef95e81d01b8882157a519030638e7.png)
forces

%Equivalent wording by Alex Zhu: Let









This post has been edited 11 times. Last edited by math154, Dec 15, 2013, 8:45 AM