ka June Highlights and 2025 AoPS Online Class Information
jlacosta0
Jun 2, 2025
Congratulations to all the mathletes who competed at National MATHCOUNTS! If you missed the exciting Countdown Round, you can watch the video at this link. Are you interested in training for MATHCOUNTS or AMC 10 contests? How would you like to train for these math competitions in half the time? We have accelerated sections which meet twice per week instead of once starting on July 8th (7:30pm ET). These sections fill quickly so enroll today!
Summer camps are starting this month at the Virtual Campus in math and language arts that are 2 - to 4 - weeks in duration. Spaces are still available - don’t miss your chance to have a transformative summer experience. There are middle and high school competition math camps as well as Math Beasts camps that review key topics coupled with fun explorations covering areas such as graph theory (Math Beasts Camp 6), cryptography (Math Beasts Camp 7-8), and topology (Math Beasts Camp 8-9)!
Be sure to mark your calendars for the following upcoming events:
[list][*]June 5th, Thursday, 7:30pm ET: Open Discussion with Ben Kornell and Andrew Sutherland, Art of Problem Solving's incoming CEO Ben Kornell and CPO Andrew Sutherland host an Ask Me Anything-style chat. Come ask your questions and get to know our incoming CEO & CPO!
[*]June 9th, Monday, 7:30pm ET, Game Jam: Operation Shuffle!, Come join us to play our second round of Operation Shuffle! If you enjoy number sense, logic, and a healthy dose of luck, this is the game for you. No specific math background is required; all are welcome.[/list]
Our full course list for upcoming classes is below:
All classes run 7:30pm-8:45pm ET/4:30pm - 5:45pm PT unless otherwise noted.
Prealgebra 1
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Monday, Jun 30 - Oct 20
Wednesday, Jul 16 - Oct 29
Sunday, Aug 17 - Dec 14
Tuesday, Aug 26 - Dec 16
Friday, Sep 5 - Jan 16
Monday, Sep 8 - Jan 12
Tuesday, Sep 16 - Jan 20 (4:30 - 5:45 pm ET/1:30 - 2:45 pm PT)
Sunday, Sep 21 - Jan 25
Thursday, Sep 25 - Jan 29
Wednesday, Oct 22 - Feb 25
Tuesday, Nov 4 - Mar 10
Friday, Dec 12 - Apr 10
Prealgebra 2
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 29 - Oct 26
Friday, Jul 25 - Nov 21
Sunday, Aug 17 - Dec 14
Tuesday, Sep 9 - Jan 13
Thursday, Sep 25 - Jan 29
Sunday, Oct 19 - Feb 22
Monday, Oct 27 - Mar 2
Wednesday, Nov 12 - Mar 18
Introduction to Algebra A
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Thursday, Jun 26 - Oct 9
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Oct 28
Sunday, Aug 17 - Dec 14
Wednesday, Aug 27 - Dec 17
Friday, Sep 5 - Jan 16
Thursday, Sep 11 - Jan 15
Sunday, Sep 28 - Feb 1
Monday, Oct 6 - Feb 9
Tuesday, Oct 21 - Feb 24
Sunday, Nov 9 - Mar 15
Friday, Dec 5 - Apr 3
Introduction to Counting & Probability
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Wednesday, Jul 2 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jul 27 - Oct 19
Monday, Aug 11 - Nov 3
Wednesday, Sep 3 - Nov 19
Sunday, Sep 21 - Dec 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Friday, Oct 3 - Jan 16
Tuesday, Nov 4 - Feb 10
Sunday, Dec 7 - Mar 8
Introduction to Number Theory
Monday, Jun 9 - Aug 25
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Sep 30
Wednesday, Aug 13 - Oct 29
Friday, Sep 12 - Dec 12
Sunday, Oct 26 - Feb 1
Monday, Dec 1 - Mar 2
Introduction to Algebra B
Wednesday, Jun 4 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Oct 19
Friday, Jul 18 - Nov 14
Thursday, Aug 7 - Nov 20
Monday, Aug 18 - Dec 15
Sunday, Sep 7 - Jan 11
Thursday, Sep 11 - Jan 15
Wednesday, Sep 24 - Jan 28
Sunday, Oct 26 - Mar 1
Tuesday, Nov 4 - Mar 10
Monday, Dec 1 - Mar 30
Introduction to Geometry
Monday, Jun 16 - Dec 8
Friday, Jun 20 - Jan 9
Sunday, Jun 29 - Jan 11
Monday, Jul 14 - Jan 19
Wednesday, Aug 13 - Feb 11
Tuesday, Aug 26 - Feb 24
Sunday, Sep 7 - Mar 8
Thursday, Sep 11 - Mar 12
Wednesday, Sep 24 - Mar 25
Sunday, Oct 26 - Apr 26
Monday, Nov 3 - May 4
Friday, Dec 5 - May 29
Paradoxes and Infinity
Mon, Tue, Wed, & Thurs, Jul 14 - Jul 16 (meets every day of the week!)
Intermediate: Grades 8-12
Intermediate Algebra
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 23
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Nov 18
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 10
Sunday, Jul 13 - Jan 18
Thursday, Jul 24 - Jan 22
Friday, Aug 8 - Feb 20
Tuesday, Aug 26 - Feb 24
Sunday, Sep 28 - Mar 29
Wednesday, Oct 8 - Mar 8
Sunday, Nov 16 - May 17
Thursday, Dec 11 - Jun 4
Precalculus
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 9
Monday, Jun 30 - Dec 8
Wednesday, Aug 6 - Jan 21
Tuesday, Sep 9 - Feb 24
Sunday, Sep 21 - Mar 8
Monday, Oct 20 - Apr 6
Sunday, Dec 14 - May 31
MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Basics
Monday, Jun 2 - Aug 18
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)
Sunday, Aug 17 - Nov 9
Wednesday, Sep 3 - Nov 19
Tuesday, Sep 16 - Dec 9
Sunday, Sep 21 - Dec 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Monday, Oct 6 - Jan 12
Thursday, Oct 16 - Jan 22
Tues, Thurs & Sun, Dec 9 - Jan 18 (meets three times a week!)
MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Advanced
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)
Sunday, Aug 17 - Nov 9
Tuesday, Aug 26 - Nov 11
Thursday, Sep 4 - Nov 20
Friday, Sep 12 - Dec 12
Monday, Sep 15 - Dec 8
Sunday, Oct 5 - Jan 11
Tues, Thurs & Sun, Dec 2 - Jan 11 (meets three times a week!)
Mon, Wed & Fri, Dec 8 - Jan 16 (meets three times a week!)
AMC 10 Problem Series
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)
Sunday, Aug 10 - Nov 2
Thursday, Aug 14 - Oct 30
Tuesday, Aug 19 - Nov 4
Mon & Wed, Sep 15 - Oct 22 (meets twice a week!)
Mon, Wed & Fri, Oct 6 - Nov 3 (meets three times a week!)
Tue, Thurs & Sun, Oct 7 - Nov 2 (meets three times a week!)
AMC 10 Final Fives
Monday, Jun 30 - Jul 21
Friday, Aug 15 - Sep 12
Sunday, Sep 7 - Sep 28
Tuesday, Sep 9 - Sep 30
Monday, Sep 22 - Oct 13
Sunday, Sep 28 - Oct 19 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Wednesday, Oct 8 - Oct 29
Thursday, Oct 9 - Oct 30
AMC 12 Problem Series
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Wednesday, Aug 6 - Oct 22
Sunday, Aug 10 - Nov 2
Monday, Aug 18 - Nov 10
Mon & Wed, Sep 15 - Oct 22 (meets twice a week!)
Tues, Thurs & Sun, Oct 7 - Nov 2 (meets three times a week!)
AMC 12 Final Fives
Thursday, Sep 4 - Sep 25
Sunday, Sep 28 - Oct 19
Tuesday, Oct 7 - Oct 28
Introduction to Programming with Python
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Tuesday, Jun 17 - Sep 2
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22
Thursday, Aug 14 - Oct 30
Sunday, Sep 7 - Nov 23
Tuesday, Dec 2 - Mar 3
Let be a sequence of integers with infinitely many positive and negative terms. Suppose that for every positive integer the numbers leave different remainders upon division by .
Prove that every integer occurs exactly once in the sequence .
Let be a scalene triangle with incircle . Denote by the midpoint of arc in the circumcircle of , and by the point where the -excircle touches . Suppose the circumcircle of meets again at and intersects at two points ,.
None of this is original, but I don't remember how I picked it up and don't have a good place to refer to every time I feel the need (which I bet exists and somebody will point it out to me really soon because of Cunningham's law but anyway):
Let's say you have a functional equation like:
[quote]Find all functions such that for all .[/quote]
(I just made this up by putting a lot of random s on the page, by the way. I hope it's solvable.)
Many people who are new to functional equations will write a solution like, "Let . Then we have . Then . ..."
Depending on the problem, this can be an okay writeup, but more often it gets really confusing and hard to read. The issue is usually something like you want to take in the equation and replace it with, say, or or something else depending on , and then do something else with that equation; or you might want to swap and in the equation. But writing "Let " or anything resembling that is horrible... if doesn't that just mean ? How do we know whether the two 's on the two sides of your equation are the same, and if not, which one is which?
The short workaround is to use a different variable name, "Let ", and then end up with an equation involving that you do more things with, but sometimes this requires extra foresight into what you're going to do with the equation and can be annoying for a different host of reasons, e.g. you accidentally reuse a variable name used elsewhere.
The cleanest way around this is to start your solution by saying, "Let denote [the given functional equation]": for example, "Let denote the statement "
Then you can do things like "replace with " with no ambiguity just by writing "".
In our example, we might write:
From we get for all . Plugging back into we get for all . Let denote this statement.
Suppose ; then by comparing with we see so , and so is injective.
Comparing with , we see... (rest of solution left as exercise for reader)
I'm not even sure why is the right letter to use, but that was the letter I learned at whatever point I picked this up and it seems pretty common on the fora — some people even use the in their solution to functional equations without even defining . (I don't recommend that.)
(I actually probably won't even end up referring to this post because it's written in such a casual manner for this blog but eh, post in February)
An anti-homomorphism from a ring to a ring is a homomorphism (what a great letter) between the additive groups that also satisfies and for any .
A Jordan homomorphism from a ring to a ring is a homomorphism between the additive groups that also satisfies and for any .
Why do people have so many things named after them!?
If is a domain, then the Jordan homomorphism is either a homomorphism or an anti-homomorphism.
This is so literally a functional equation...
Proof.
Let denote the statement .
Hmm qq is a substring of \qquad. /random
Subtracting and from yields
(since is an additive group homomorphism)
Let this statement be .
So, for any we have
using and and of course the additive-group-homomorphism properties.
(darn I'm not sure what the best way to typeset this without overflowing width is)
So (this is the only place where we use the condition that is a domain) one of the factors in the original expression is 0, i.e. either or for any (*).
In fact, the single condition (*) plus the additive-group-homomorphism properties are sufficient to prove that is either a homomorphism or an anti-homomorphism.
To prove this, we need to show it works like a homomorphism on all pairs with , or like an anti-homomorphism on all pairs with . This is somewhat an abuse of English but I think it gets the point across better than equation after equation. We provide two ways to finish.
The Straightforward Bash
Claim. For any , either acts as a homomorphism or as an anti-homomorphism on both pairs and . Similar remarks hold for and .
Proof of claim. If this is not true, then the only other possibility for (*) is that acts as a homomorphism on one pair and as an anti-homomorphism on the other.
Suppose (WLOG) and . Consider .
If then too.
Otherwise if then too.
Both contradict our initial assumption. Thus acts as a homomorphism on both or as an anti-homomorphism on both. -- end claim --
Now: suppose works on some pair as only a homomorphism and on some other pair as only an anti-homomorphism, that is: while .
From what we just derived, this forces to work as both a homomorphism and an anti-homomorphism on the pairs and . Thus:
i.e. works on as only a homomorphism, and on as only an anti-homomorphism, impossible.
Thus is fully a homomorphism or fully an anti-homomorphism (it may be partially both, on elements that commute). Q.E.D.
Slick Group Theory!
Observe:
1.
2. and together imply (additive homomorphism properties + distributivity)
3. implies since obviously commutes with everybody multiplicatively just like
(Firefox, how can you not think "multiplicatively" is a word?!)
Therefore, for any , the set of all such that is a subgroup of the additive group of .
Similar remarks hold if you fix and collect all , or if you look at pairs with , or both.
Some quick group-theory lemmata:
Lemma 1. The intersection of any number of subgroups of a group is a subgroup. Proof. Just verify all the axioms trivially.
Lemma 2. If the union of two subgroups and of a group is itself then one of the subgroups is improper. Proof: If is included in or vice versa, the result is clear; otherwise, take and and observe that is in neither nor , a contradiction.
Therefore:
Fix and collect and .
From (*), ; also, as we discussed, and are subgroups of the additive group of . Then by Lemma 2, either or (**).
Now collect and .
Note that , which is a subgroup of from our initial discussion and Lemma 1. Similarly, is a subgroup of too. Then (**) says that for any , either or , i.e. . By Lemma 2 either , whence is a homomorphism, or , whence is an anti-homomorphism. Q.E.D.
Cyclic points [variations on a Fuhrmann generalization]
shobber26
NTuesday at 7:51 PM
by bjump
Source: China TST 2006
is the orthocentre of .,, are on the circumcircle of such that .,, are the semetrical points of ,, with respect to ,,. Show that lie on the same circle.
is the orthocentre of .,, are on the circumcircle of such that .,, are the semetrical points of ,, with respect to ,,. Show that lie on the same circle.
is the orthocentre of .,, are on the circumcircle of such that .,, are the semetrical points of ,, with respect to ,,. Show that lie on the same circle.
Solution: We assume, arc not containing . Rename, as . Clearly, ,, concur on , say at . Also, it follows from Simson Lines, that are Isogonal WRT . We'll now show is cyclic. Hence, is cyclic as desired! Similarly, and are cyclic. These two angle equalities imply, cyclic Excuse
I know, I should have attached a diagram with this to avoid any misunderstanding due to configuration issue.
, with the circumcircle as the unit circle, will be our free variables. Note that due to parallel conditions we have that and
Then, Now, we translate by to get These 4 points are clearly all on the unit circle, so we have shown that can be translated to a unit circle, and are therefore concyclic
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by AwesomeYRY, Apr 9, 2021, 5:13 AM
We use complex number. is our unit circle. Consider . So . And suppose is any point on the unit circle. From the parallel condition we get a relation between points that The co-ordinate of . Similarly . For being concyclic, the quantity must be Substituting the conjugates of all points (1 minute computation) we get the same quantity. Therefore it must be a real number and we are done.
This post has been edited 2 times. Last edited by Tafi_ak, Dec 2, 2021, 1:18 PM
Sketch :Note that and similarly other cases hold.
Prove that are concurrent and they lie on
If these 3 lines concurr at prove that and similarly other symnetrical quadrilaterals are cyclic.
Now use this cyclicities to prove the final concyclicity.
All of these can be proved by angels
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by HoRI_DA_GRe8, Apr 24, 2022, 11:35 AM
is the orthocentre of .,, are on the circumcircle of such that .,, are the semetrical points of ,, with respect to ,,. Show that lie on the same circle.
The parallel condition gives us for some complex number of magnitude , so ,,. Then, using the complex foot formula, we can find that This means , and we similarly find that ,. Now, to show that is concyclic, it suffices to prove that is real, or it equals its conjugate. First, we evaluate the quantity as it is; noting that , we get The conjugate of this is so we are done.
WLOG, let be the unit circle and rotate so that is parallel to the -axis. Therefore, we have that ,, and . Using reflection formulas, we find that ,, and .
From here, we find that since is equal to its conjugate, meaning that it's real, ,,, and are concyclic, and we are done.
Let the real line be the line through perpendicular to all of . Thus, we have and so on. We have that and similarly We wish to show that these are concyclic with . Of course, shift by , so we wish to show are concyclic. Thus, it suffices to show that is real. This is just because as desired.
First consider the following so are isogonal, similarly are isogonal and thus the isogonal conjugate of is the intersection of and which lies on the shared perpendicular bisector of Similarly for and thus we get that are on the isogonal conjugate of this perpendicular bisector which is a rectangular circumhyperbola.
Now the center of this hyperbola lies on the nine point circle so the antipode of on this hyperbola lies on by homothety, but lies on the hyperbola and this circle (by angle chasing) so it is the antipode of (since are already on the hyperbola and two conics intersect at points). Then concur at the center of the hyperbola, which lies on the nine point circle, and are reflections over this point. But the reflection of the point where the hyperbola meets again over the center of the hyperbola will be which finishes.
We havewhere follows from . Hence the rotation with centre and angle maps to and to also maps to . Hence and , so is a parallelogram. Analogously we get that and are parallelograms. Now let be the common midpoint of , and , then it suffices to prove that the reflection of wrt is on , i.e. that is on the nine point circle of . After a homothety with centre and ratio it suffices to prove that if is the reflection of wrt the midpoint of then , but this follows fromDone.
Complex
Use complex numbers with as the unit circle. Then from we get and . Hence , and . We also have . HenceThereforeWe conclude that are concyclic.
The parallel condition tells us that . We can compute , we can similarly compute and as well and we know that . For to be cyclic, we want to be real. So, Now,
We proceed with complex numbers. Let be the unit circle with and all perpendicular to the real axis. Then, if we let and be represented by the complex numbers and respectively, then it follows that the complex numbers representing and are and respectively.
Now, using the fact that the reflection of a complex number over the segment between two complex numbers and is if all three of them are on the unit circle, we find that the complex numbers representing and are and respectively. Also, it is well-known that so it suffices to show that the quadrilateral with vertices represented by the complex numbers and is cyclic. First, let us translate all of the vertices by which clearly preserves whether or not they are concyclic, to get Also, let us multiply all of the vertices by which also clearly preservers whether or not they are concyclic, to yield
Now, it suffices to show that the complex number is real. Taking its conjugate, we get concluding the proof.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by lpieleanu, Mar 10, 2025, 11:22 PM
Let us redefine as Let be We have that the foot from to is Thus, is Now, using the fact that and the reflections, we have that are all parallelograms. Thus, we can compute To prove cyclic, we can just prove that We can do this by proving that Here is the computation: and hence we are done.
Complex bash with as the unit circle let ,,, we have ,, and . We can compute ,,.
It suffices to show the following: Conjugating gives Therefore it is real and is cyclic.