Stay ahead of learning milestones! Enroll in a class over the summer!

G
Topic
First Poster
Last Poster
k a May Highlights and 2025 AoPS Online Class Information
jlacosta   0
May 1, 2025
May is an exciting month! National MATHCOUNTS is the second week of May in Washington D.C. and our Founder, Richard Rusczyk will be presenting a seminar, Preparing Strong Math Students for College and Careers, on May 11th.

Are you interested in working towards MATHCOUNTS and don’t know where to start? We have you covered! If you have taken Prealgebra, then you are ready for MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Basics. Already aiming for State or National MATHCOUNTS and harder AMC 8 problems? Then our MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Advanced course is for you.

Summer camps are starting next 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 an enriching 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][*]May 9th, 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, Casework 2: Overwhelming Evidence — A Text Adventure, a game where participants will work together to navigate the map, solve puzzles, and win! All are welcome.
[*]May 19th, 4:30pm PT/7:30pm ET, What's Next After Beast Academy?, designed for students finishing Beast Academy and ready for Prealgebra 1.
[*]May 20th, 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Mathcamp 2025 Qualifying Quiz Part 1 Math Jam, Problems 1 to 4, join the Canada/USA Mathcamp staff for this exciting Math Jam, where they discuss solutions to Problems 1 to 4 of the 2025 Mathcamp Qualifying Quiz!
[*]May 21st, 4:00pm PT/7:00pm ET, Mathcamp 2025 Qualifying Quiz Part 2 Math Jam, Problems 5 and 6, Canada/USA Mathcamp staff will discuss solutions to Problems 5 and 6 of the 2025 Mathcamp Qualifying Quiz![/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.

Introductory: Grades 5-10

Prealgebra 1 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 1
Tuesday, May 13 - Aug 26
Thursday, May 29 - Sep 11
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Monday, Jun 30 - Oct 20
Wednesday, Jul 16 - Oct 29

Prealgebra 2 Self-Paced

Prealgebra 2
Wednesday, May 7 - Aug 20
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 29 - Oct 26
Friday, Jul 25 - Nov 21

Introduction to Algebra A Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra A
Sunday, May 11 - Sep 14 (1:00 - 2:30 pm ET/10:00 - 11:30 am PT)
Wednesday, May 14 - Aug 27
Friday, May 30 - Sep 26
Monday, Jun 2 - Sep 22
Sunday, Jun 15 - Oct 12
Thursday, Jun 26 - Oct 9
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Oct 28

Introduction to Counting & Probability Self-Paced

Introduction to Counting & Probability
Thursday, May 15 - Jul 31
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Wednesday, Jul 9 - Sep 24
Sunday, Jul 27 - Oct 19

Introduction to Number Theory
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Monday, Jun 9 - Aug 25
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Tuesday, Jul 15 - Sep 30

Introduction to Algebra B Self-Paced

Introduction to Algebra B
Tuesday, May 6 - Aug 19
Wednesday, Jun 4 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Oct 19
Friday, Jul 18 - Nov 14

Introduction to Geometry
Sunday, May 11 - Nov 9
Tuesday, May 20 - Oct 28
Monday, Jun 16 - Dec 8
Friday, Jun 20 - Jan 9
Sunday, Jun 29 - Jan 11
Monday, Jul 14 - Jan 19

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

Intermediate Counting & Probability
Wednesday, May 21 - Sep 17
Sunday, Jun 22 - Nov 2

Intermediate Number Theory
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Wednesday, Jun 18 - Sep 3

Precalculus
Friday, May 16 - Oct 24
Sunday, Jun 1 - Nov 9
Monday, Jun 30 - Dec 8

Advanced: Grades 9-12

Olympiad Geometry
Tuesday, Jun 10 - Aug 26

Calculus
Tuesday, May 27 - Nov 11
Wednesday, Jun 25 - Dec 17

Group Theory
Thursday, Jun 12 - Sep 11

Contest Preparation: Grades 6-12

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Basics
Friday, May 23 - Aug 15
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!)

MATHCOUNTS/AMC 8 Advanced
Sunday, May 11 - Aug 10
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Tues & Thurs, Jul 8 - Aug 14 (meets twice a week!)

AMC 10 Problem Series
Friday, May 9 - Aug 1
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!)

AMC 10 Final Fives
Sunday, May 11 - Jun 8
Tuesday, May 27 - Jun 17
Monday, Jun 30 - Jul 21

AMC 12 Problem Series
Tuesday, May 27 - Aug 12
Thursday, Jun 12 - Aug 28
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21
Wednesday, Aug 6 - Oct 22

AMC 12 Final Fives
Sunday, May 18 - Jun 15

AIME Problem Series A
Thursday, May 22 - Jul 31

AIME Problem Series B
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 21

F=ma Problem Series
Wednesday, Jun 11 - Aug 27

WOOT Programs
Visit the pages linked for full schedule details for each of these programs!


MathWOOT Level 1
MathWOOT Level 2
ChemWOOT
CodeWOOT
PhysicsWOOT

Programming

Introduction to Programming with Python
Thursday, May 22 - Aug 7
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

Intermediate Programming with Python
Sunday, Jun 1 - Aug 24
Monday, Jun 30 - Sep 22

USACO Bronze Problem Series
Tuesday, May 13 - Jul 29
Sunday, Jun 22 - Sep 1

Physics

Introduction to Physics
Wednesday, May 21 - Aug 6
Sunday, Jun 15 - Sep 14
Monday, Jun 23 - Sep 15

Physics 1: Mechanics
Thursday, May 22 - Oct 30
Monday, Jun 23 - Dec 15

Relativity
Mon, Tue, Wed & Thurs, Jun 23 - Jun 26 (meets every day of the week!)
0 replies
jlacosta
May 1, 2025
0 replies
Expensive n-tuples
jlammy   28
N 4 minutes ago by Jupiterballs
Source: EGMO 2017 P5
Let $n\geq2$ be an integer. An $n$-tuple $(a_1,a_2,\dots,a_n)$ of not necessarily different positive integers is expensive if there exists a positive integer $k$ such that $$(a_1+a_2)(a_2+a_3)\dots(a_{n-1}+a_n)(a_n+a_1)=2^{2k-1}.$$a) Find all integers $n\geq2$ for which there exists an expensive $n$-tuple.

b) Prove that for every odd positive integer $m$ there exists an integer $n\geq2$ such that $m$ belongs to an expensive $n$-tuple.

There are exactly $n$ factors in the product on the left hand side.


28 replies
jlammy
Apr 9, 2017
Jupiterballs
4 minutes ago
Equal areas of the triangles on the parabola
NO_SQUARES   1
N 23 minutes ago by Photaesthesia
Source: Regional Stage of ARO 2025 10.10; also Kvant 2025 no. 3 M2837
On the graphic of the function $y=x^2$ were selected $1000$ pairwise distinct points, abscissas of which are integer numbers from the segment $[0; 100000]$. Prove that it is possible to choose six different selected points $A$, $B$, $C$, $A'$, $B'$, $C'$ such that areas of triangles $ABC$ and $A'B'C'$ are equals.
A. Tereshin
1 reply
NO_SQUARES
Yesterday at 7:41 PM
Photaesthesia
23 minutes ago
forced vertices in graphs
Davdav1232   2
N 30 minutes ago by Davdav1232
Source: Israel TST 7 2025 p2
Let \( G \) be a graph colored using \( k \) colors. We say that a vertex is forced if it has neighbors in all the other \( k - 1 \) colors.

Prove that for any \( 2024 \)-regular graph \( G \) that contains no triangles or quadrilaterals, there exists a coloring using \( 2025 \) colors such that at least \( 1013 \) of the colors have a forced vertex of that color.

Note: The graph coloring must be valid, this means no \( 2 \) vertices of the same color may be adjacent.
2 replies
Davdav1232
May 8, 2025
Davdav1232
30 minutes ago
Transposition?
EeEeRUT   0
40 minutes ago
Source: Thailand MO 2025 P8
For each integer sequence $a_1, a_2, a_3, \dots, a_n$, a single parity swapping is to choose $2$ terms in this sequence, say $a_i$ and $a_j$, such that $a_i + a_j$ is odd, then switch their placement, while the other terms stay in place. This creates a new sequence.

Find the minimal number of single parity swapping to transform the sequence $1,2,3, \dots, 2025$ to $2025, \dots, 3, 2, 1$, using only single parity swapping.
0 replies
EeEeRUT
40 minutes ago
0 replies
P vs NP Problem
aoum   1
N Mar 20, 2025 by aoum
The P vs. NP Problem: One of the Greatest Unsolved Questions in Computer Science

The P vs. NP problem is one of the most profound and long-standing unsolved problems in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It is one of the seven Millennium Prize Problems, meaning that a correct proof (or disproof) earns a reward of $1,000,000 from the Clay Mathematics Institute.

At its core, the P vs. NP problem asks:

Is every problem whose solution can be verified quickly also solvable quickly?

More formally:

Does P = NP?

If the answer is "yes," it means that problems for which a solution can be verified quickly (in polynomial time) can also be solved quickly. If "no," then there are problems that are inherently hard to solve, even though checking a solution is easy.


[center]IMAGE[/center]


[center]Euler diagram for P, NP, NP-complete, and NP-hard set of problems (excluding the empty language and its complement, which belong to P but are not NP-complete)[/center]

1. Understanding P and NP

In complexity theory, problems are classified based on how efficiently they can be solved by an algorithm. The classes P and NP describe two fundamental categories of decision problems.

[list]
[*] P (Polynomial Time): This is the class of decision problems that can be solved by a deterministic Turing machine in polynomial time. In other words, if a problem is in P, there exists an algorithm that can solve it in time bounded by a polynomial function of the input size.

Examples of problems in P include:
[list]
[*] Sorting a list (using algorithms like merge sort).
[*] Finding the greatest common divisor (using the Euclidean algorithm).
[*] Determining whether a number is prime (with modern algorithms like AKS primality testing).
[/list]

[*] NP (Nondeterministic Polynomial Time): This is the class of decision problems where a proposed solution can be verified in polynomial time by a deterministic Turing machine. An equivalent definition is that NP problems can be solved by a nondeterministic Turing machine in polynomial time.

Examples of problems in NP include:
[list]
[*] The Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP): Given a list of cities and distances between them, is there a tour visiting each city exactly once with a total length less than a given value?
[*] The Boolean Satisfiability Problem (SAT): Given a Boolean formula, is there an assignment of variables that makes the formula true?
[*] Graph Coloring: Can the vertices of a graph be colored with $k$ colors such that no two adjacent vertices share the same color?
[/list]
[/list]

By definition, we have:

\[
\text{P} \subseteq \text{NP}.
\]
The open question is whether this inclusion is strict: Is P = NP, or is P $\neq$ NP?

2. NP-Complete Problems: The Hardest Problems in NP

A subset of NP problems, called NP-complete problems, are the "hardest" problems in NP. If any NP-complete problem can be solved in polynomial time, then P = NP.

To formally define NP-complete problems:

A problem $X$ is NP-complete if:

[list]
[*] $X \in \text{NP}$ (it is in NP, meaning solutions can be verified in polynomial time).
[*] Every other problem in NP can be reduced to $X$ in polynomial time (this means if you can solve $X$ efficiently, you can solve all NP problems efficiently).
[/list]

The first NP-complete problem, Boolean satisfiability (SAT), was proved by Stephen Cook in 1971 through the famous Cook-Levin theorem. Since then, thousands of problems have been shown to be NP-complete.

Examples of NP-complete problems:

[list]
[*] SAT (Boolean Satisfiability Problem).
[*] Traveling Salesman Problem (decision version).
[*] 3-Colorability (can a graph be colored with 3 colors?).
[*] Subset Sum Problem (is there a subset of numbers that sums to a target value?).
[/list]

3. Implications of P = NP or P ≠ NP

The resolution of the P vs. NP problem would have enormous implications across mathematics, computer science, cryptography, and more.

If P = NP:

[list]
[*] Every problem for which a solution can be verified quickly can also be solved quickly.
[*] Many currently hard problems (such as breaking cryptographic codes) would become easy.
[*] Modern encryption methods based on the hardness of NP problems (like RSA) would become insecure.
[*] Solutions to many practical optimization problems would become feasible in real time.
[/list]

If P ≠ NP:

[list]
[*] There exist problems in NP that are inherently hard to solve, even though their solutions can be verified efficiently.
[*] Cryptographic systems would remain secure.
[*] Certain problems (such as protein folding, perfect route planning) will likely remain computationally infeasible to solve exactly.
[/list]

4. Attempts to Solve the P vs. NP Problem

Despite extensive efforts, no one has been able to prove or disprove whether P = NP. Some major developments include:

[list]
[*] Cook-Levin Theorem (1971): Stephen Cook and independently Leonid Levin proved that SAT is NP-complete, introducing the entire field of NP-completeness.
[*] Karp’s 21 Problems (1972): Richard Karp showed that 21 classical problems (including TSP and graph coloring) are NP-complete.
[*] Cryptographic Evidence: Many encryption systems rely on the assumption that P ≠ NP, though this is not a proof.
[*] Relativization (Baker, Gill, and Solovay – 1975): Certain techniques (oracle machines) cannot resolve P vs. NP, suggesting new methods are needed.
[/list]

5. Theoretical and Practical Consequences

If P = NP, it would revolutionize fields such as:

[list]
[*] Cryptography: Encryption systems would collapse, making secure communication impossible.
[*] Artificial Intelligence: Efficient solutions to complex problems like natural language understanding and protein folding would become possible.
[*] Optimization: Problems like airline scheduling and supply chain management would become trivial to solve.
[/list]

If P ≠ NP, it would confirm the inherent hardness of many problems and validate the foundation of computational security.

6. Summary

[list]
[*] P vs. NP asks whether every problem whose solution can be verified in polynomial time can also be solved in polynomial time.
[*] If P = NP, many hard problems would become easy to solve, impacting encryption and optimization.
[*] If P ≠ NP, some problems remain inherently difficult to solve efficiently.
[*] The P vs. NP problem remains unsolved and is one of the most important open questions in computer science and mathematics.
[/list]

7. References


[center][youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQsdygaYcE4[/youtube][/center]

[list]
[*] Clay Mathematics Institute: P vs NP Problem
[*] Arora, S., & Barak, B. Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach.
[*] Garey, M. R., & Johnson, D. S. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness.
[*] Wikipedia: P vs NP Problem
[*] AoPS: P vs NP Problem
[/list]
1 reply
aoum
Mar 20, 2025
aoum
Mar 20, 2025
Famous Mathematical Conjectures
aoum   0
Mar 2, 2025
Exploring Fascinating Math Conjectures: A Journey into the Unknown

Mathematics is a field that is full of beautiful puzzles, some of which have remained unsolved for centuries. These unsolved problems, or conjectures, challenge mathematicians to delve deeper into the abstract world of numbers, shapes, and logic. In this blog, we'll explore five of the most intriguing mathematical conjectures, and break down their significance in the world of mathematics.

1. The Riemann Hypothesis

The Riemann Hypothesis, proposed by Bernhard Riemann in 1859, is one of the most famous and long-standing conjectures in mathematics. It is a statement about the distribution of prime numbers, which is one of the central topics in number theory. To understand the conjecture, we first need to introduce the concept of the Riemann zeta function:

\[
\zeta(s) = \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{1}{n^s}
\]for complex numbers \( s \) with a real part greater than 1. This infinite series converges for \( \Re(s) > 1 \), but the Riemann zeta function is also analytically continued to other values of \( s \), except for \( s = 1 \), where it has a pole.

The Riemann Hypothesis posits that all **non-trivial zeros** of the Riemann zeta function, the values of \( s \) where \( \zeta(s) = 0 \), lie on the "critical line," where the real part of \( s \) is \( \frac{1}{2} \). In other words, all such zeros should be of the form \( \frac{1}{2} + it \), where \( t \) is a real number.

The conjecture is deeply important because the distribution of these zeros is intimately tied to the distribution of prime numbers. The location of the zeros gives us insights into how prime numbers are spread along the number line. The truth of the Riemann Hypothesis would lead to breakthroughs in prime number theory, cryptography, and many other areas of mathematics.

2. The Collatz Conjecture (3x+1 Problem)

The Collatz Conjecture, sometimes called the "3x+1 problem," is an elementary-looking problem that has stumped mathematicians for decades. It starts with any positive integer \( n \) and applies the following steps:
[list]
[*]If \( n \) is even, divide it by 2.
[*]If \( n \) is odd, multiply it by 3 and add 1.
[/list]

Repeat the process with the resulting number. The conjecture asserts that no matter what positive integer you start with, the sequence will always eventually reach 1.

For example, starting with \( n = 6 \):
\[
6 \rightarrow 3 \rightarrow 10 \rightarrow 5 \rightarrow 16 \rightarrow 8 \rightarrow 4 \rightarrow 2 \rightarrow 1
\]While this looks simple, the Collatz Conjecture remains unsolved. The sequence has been verified for a large range of numbers, but a general proof that every positive integer eventually reaches 1 is still elusive. No one has been able to prove that the sequence always terminates, nor has anyone been able to find a counterexample. The conjecture is puzzling because it involves very basic operations but exhibits unpredictable behavior.

Mathematically, the conjecture touches on dynamics, number theory, and iterated functions, but its ultimate resolution remains one of the great mysteries of mathematics.

3. The Goldbach Conjecture

The Goldbach Conjecture, proposed by Christian Goldbach in 1742, is one of the oldest and most famous unsolved problems in number theory. It posits that:

\[
\text{Every even integer greater than 2 is the sum of two prime numbers.}
\]
For example:
[list]
[*]4 = 2 + 2
[*]6 = 3 + 3
[*]8 = 3 + 5
[*]10 = 5 + 5
[/list]

The conjecture has been tested for very large numbers, and no counterexample has been found. In fact, it is believed that every even number greater than 2 can be written as the sum of two primes, but a formal proof is still missing.

The conjecture has important implications for understanding the additive structure of prime numbers. It suggests that primes are much more prevalent in our number system than might first be expected. Mathematicians have attempted many approaches to prove Goldbach’s Conjecture, including using powerful tools from analytic number theory, but a solution remains elusive.

4. The P vs NP Problem

The P vs NP Problem is one of the seven Millennium Prize Problems and has profound implications for computer science and mathematics. It asks whether the class of problems that can be solved efficiently (in polynomial time) is the same as the class of problems whose solutions can be verified efficiently.

Let’s define the terms:
[list]
[*]P represents the class of problems that can be solved in polynomial time (i.e., there is an algorithm that can find the solution in time proportional to a polynomial function of the input size).
[*]NP represents the class of problems for which a proposed solution can be verified in polynomial time (i.e., if someone gives you a potential solution, you can check it in polynomial time).
[/list]

The P vs NP problem asks whether every problem for which a solution can be verified quickly (i.e., in polynomial time) can also be solved quickly. In other words, is P equal to NP?

If P = NP, it would imply that many problems we currently think are difficult to solve could actually be solved quickly, revolutionizing fields like cryptography, optimization, and artificial intelligence. On the other hand, if P ≠ NP, it would affirm that there are problems that, while easy to check, are inherently difficult to solve. Despite significant effort, no one has yet been able to prove whether P = NP or P ≠ NP, making this one of the most profound open questions in mathematics.

5. The Twin Prime Conjecture

The Twin Prime Conjecture posits that there are infinitely many pairs of prime numbers that differ by exactly 2. These pairs are known as twin primes. Some examples include:
[list]
[*](3, 5)
[*](5, 7)
[*](11, 13)
[*](17, 19)
[/list]

The conjecture was first proposed by the mathematician Alphonse de Polignac in 1846. It suggests that for every large number \( n \), there will always be some twin prime pair larger than \( n \).

While the conjecture has not been proven, a number of important results have been obtained in its study. In 2013, mathematician Yitang Zhang made a breakthrough by showing that there are infinitely many pairs of primes that differ by at most 70 million. While this does not directly prove the Twin Prime Conjecture, it was the first time anyone had shown that there is a bounded gap between prime numbers. Since then, other mathematicians have continued to refine this bound.

The conjecture is closely related to the distribution of prime numbers and has been a subject of intense study for over a century.

Conclusion: The Fascinating Nature of Conjectures

Mathematical conjectures like these represent the cutting edge of mathematical discovery. They challenge our understanding of numbers, shapes, and functions, and they inspire mathematicians to dig deeper into the very foundations of mathematics. Some of these conjectures have resisted proof for centuries, while others have seen recent breakthroughs, yet all of them remain crucial to the advancement of mathematical theory. The pursuit of their resolution continues to drive progress in both pure mathematics and practical applications.

Who knows? The next breakthrough might be just around the corner, waiting to be discovered.

Feel free to share your thoughts and any other conjectures that interest you in the comments below!
0 replies
aoum
Mar 2, 2025
0 replies
No more topics!
Bushy and Jumpy and the unhappy walnut reordering
popcorn1   51
N Apr 22, 2025 by Blast_S1
Source: IMO 2021 P5
Two squirrels, Bushy and Jumpy, have collected 2021 walnuts for the winter. Jumpy numbers the walnuts from 1 through 2021, and digs 2021 little holes in a circular pattern in the ground around their favourite tree. The next morning Jumpy notices that Bushy had placed one walnut into each hole, but had paid no attention to the numbering. Unhappy, Jumpy decides to reorder the walnuts by performing a sequence of 2021 moves. In the $k$-th move, Jumpy swaps the positions of the two walnuts adjacent to walnut $k$.

Prove that there exists a value of $k$ such that, on the $k$-th move, Jumpy swaps some walnuts $a$ and $b$ such that $a<k<b$.
51 replies
popcorn1
Jul 20, 2021
Blast_S1
Apr 22, 2025
Bushy and Jumpy and the unhappy walnut reordering
G H J
G H BBookmark kLocked kLocked NReply
Source: IMO 2021 P5
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
popcorn1
1098 posts
#1 • 17 Y
Y by Functional_equation, centslordm, InternetPerson10, Mathmick51, TheStrayCat, megarnie, Aritra12, 554183, adityaguharoy, Aopamy, yshk, deplasmanyollari, eggymath, Kingsbane2139, Rounak_iitr, Funcshun840, cubres
Two squirrels, Bushy and Jumpy, have collected 2021 walnuts for the winter. Jumpy numbers the walnuts from 1 through 2021, and digs 2021 little holes in a circular pattern in the ground around their favourite tree. The next morning Jumpy notices that Bushy had placed one walnut into each hole, but had paid no attention to the numbering. Unhappy, Jumpy decides to reorder the walnuts by performing a sequence of 2021 moves. In the $k$-th move, Jumpy swaps the positions of the two walnuts adjacent to walnut $k$.

Prove that there exists a value of $k$ such that, on the $k$-th move, Jumpy swaps some walnuts $a$ and $b$ such that $a<k<b$.
This post has been edited 2 times. Last edited by popcorn1, Jul 20, 2021, 8:40 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
ComiCabE
25 posts
#2 • 36 Y
Y by centslordm, Modesti, lahmacun, Mathmick51, InternetPerson10, TheStrayCat, megarnie, edfearay123, NumberX, Pitagar, oolite, guptaamitu1, VicKmath7, richrow12, CahitArf, Timmy456, Bobcats, PianoPlayer111, GioOrnikapa, WinterSecret, rayfish, FragileBonds, Aopamy, SPHS1234, jeteagle, Mehrshad, Dukejukem, Rexaria112, mathmax12, levifb, TheHimMan, Stuffybear, eggymath, Funcshun840, Kingsbane2139, cubres
Let us assume that the statement is false. At each $k$'th iteration we will color the $k$'th walnut in pink. Observe that if the inequality $a<k<b$ doesn't hold, then we must have swapped walnuts of the same sort (either both uncolored or both pink). This implies that what happens to the colors is that at each iteration Jumpy just paints a certain uncolored walnut in pink.
Now let's keep track of the number of pairs of adjacent walnuts which are both pink. At the start of the process it's $0$, and at the end it's $2021$. But observe that the parity of this quantity can change only when Jumpy colors a nut that has one pink and one uncolored neighbor. A contradiction! Q.E.D.
This post has been edited 2 times. Last edited by ComiCabE, Jul 20, 2021, 9:44 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
InternetPerson10
450 posts
#3 • 8 Y
Y by TheStrayCat, sarjinius, centslordm, skyguy88, ike.chen, eggymath, Rounak_iitr, cubres
Dude awesome problem.

In the $k^{\text{th}}$ move, color walnut $k$ green. Then it suffices to show a green walnut and a brown walnut are swapped at one point. For the sake of contradiction assume otherwise, that is, every swap swaps two walnuts of the same color.

Then the state of the colors does not change after every swap, so we may reformulate the problem to the following:
Reformulation wrote:
There are $2021$ brown walnuts in a circle. In each move, Jumpy may choose one walnut whose neighbors are of the same color, and color it green. Show that Jumpy cannot color all walnuts green.
First, consider a gap of $2n$ brown walnuts between two green walnuts on either side. It's impossible to color all these walnuts green. To see this, note that if $n = 1$, neither walnut can be colored (as both neighbors are of different colors). Otherwise, make one move (it cannot be on the first or last brown walnut). This move splits the brown walnuts into two groups, with $2n-1$ brown walnuts in total. Because this is odd, the groups are of different parities, so one group must have an even number of walnuts. Then keep splitting this group until you get a gap of two brown walnuts, at which point you can't color it.

Now make two arbitrary moves; these divide the $2019$ brown walnuts into two groups. As $2019$ is odd, one of these groups must have an even number of walnuts, which you can't color all green. Yay! :DD
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
square_root_of_3
78 posts
#4 • 5 Y
Y by centslordm, megarnie, PianoPlayer111, eggymath, cubres
Call a walnut obedient if one of its neighbours is larger than it, and the other one is smaller. We call a process bad if the problem's condition is not satisfied. We want to prove that there are no bad processes.

Lemma 1. The number of obedient walnuts is of the same parity as the number of walnuts.
Proof
Lemma 2. In a bad process, for any $j \in \{0,\ldots, 2021\}$, after $j$ moves, the number of obedient walnuts with labels greater than $j$ is odd.
Proof
Now, if a process is bad, after $2021$ moves there is an odd number of obedient walnuts greater than $2021$, which is a contradiction. Therefore, bad processes don't exist.
This post has been edited 3 times. Last edited by square_root_of_3, Jul 23, 2021, 12:02 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
TheStrayCat
161 posts
#5 • 4 Y
Y by centslordm, megarnie, eggymath, cubres
(Found a mistake in my solution, please disregard)
This post has been edited 3 times. Last edited by TheStrayCat, Jul 21, 2021, 4:21 AM
Reason: Found a mistake
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
SnowPanda
186 posts
#6 • 4 Y
Y by centslordm, megarnie, eggymath, cubres
Solution
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
VulcanForge
626 posts
#7 • 6 Y
Y by Inshaallahgoldmedal, centslordm, megarnie, eggymath, i3435, cubres
Solved with Isaac Zhu, Jeffery Chen, Kevin Wu, Albert Wang, Nacho Cho, Linus Hamilton, Sam Zhang.

Assume for contradiction otherwise. On the $k$-th move, paint the $k$-th acorn red. The key observation due to the assumption at the beginning is that if we are swapping around acorn $k$, then both it's neighbors must be the same color: otherwise the problem would be finished.

Now this gives a contradiction: if we draw an edge between every pair of adjacent red acorns, at each step we gain an even number of edges. But we're supposed to have $2021$ edges at the end, contradiction.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
AnonymousBunny
339 posts
#8 • 3 Y
Y by centslordm, eggymath, cubres
Write the number 0 on each walnut initially. Suppose we change the number on walnut k to 1 on turn k. Assume the problem statement is false, then the neighbors of walnut k at turn k have the same number, so swapping them has no effect on the number sequence.

So we are changing a 0 to 1 at each step and we want to show at some point, we change a sequence like 100 to 110 or 001 to 011.

At any given time, consider the maximal contiguous runs of 0. After the first move, there is one contiguous run of length 2020. I claim that given an initial configuration of 2k consecutive zeroes surroubded by 1s at the endpoints (i.e., $1 0^{2k} 1$) (*), if we change the 0's to 1's one by one, we must hit a forbidden configuration as mentioned above.

For this we induct. Base case k=1 is trivial. For induction step note that if we change a 0 to 1 in a block of 2k consecutive 0s, we break this block into two blocks of size p,q where p+q=2k-1 is odd, so one of them must be even, say p. Induct on the block of length p.

(*) We are "unwrapping" the circle here after the first move.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by AnonymousBunny, Jul 21, 2021, 3:48 AM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
TheUltimate123
1740 posts
#9 • 8 Y
Y by centslordm, HamstPan38825, sabkx, math_comb01, eggymath, Dissonant, Rounak_iitr, cubres
Call a walnut \(k\) conservative if on the \(k\)th move Jumpy swaps walnuts \(a\) and \(b\) with \(a,b<k\), and call a walnut \(k\) liberal if on the \(k\)th move Jumpy swaps walnuts \(a\) and \(b\) with \(a,b>k\). Assume for contradiction every walnut is either conservative or liberal.

Claim: If walnut \(k\) is conservative, then it does not move after the \(k\)th move.

Proof. Indeed, I contend the neighbors of \(k\) will always be smaller than the move number. After the \(k\)th move, the neighbors of \(k\) are \(a,b<k\) by design. If on move \(t\), a neighbor of \(k\) is swapped out, since the original neighbor was less than \(t\), the new neighbor is also less than \(t\). \(\blacksquare\)

Claim: If \(k\) is conservative, then its neighbors in the final position are not conservative.

Proof. If the \(k\)th move swaps \(a\) and \(b\), with \(a,b<k\), then \(a\) and \(b\) are not conservative since they move on the \(k\)th move. Whenever either neighbor of \(k\) is replaced, each resulting neighbor \(i\) is not conservative, since it is swapped after the \(i\)th move. \(\blacksquare\)

It follows that there are at most 1010 conservative walnuts. Analogously there are at most 1010 liberal walnuts, contradicting that all walnuts are either conservative or liberal.
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by TheUltimate123, Jul 22, 2021, 4:41 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
MarkBcc168
1595 posts
#10 • 7 Y
Y by L567, centslordm, PIartist, sabkx, eggymath, Funcshun840, cubres
Assume for a contradiction that Jumpy never swaps two walnuts $a,b$ with $a<k<b$ in the $k$-th move.

Before Jumpy can swap walnuts, Bushy woke up and observed Jumpy from afar. Bushy is angry upon discovering that Jumpy randomly swaps his beautifully arranged walnuts, so after the $k$-th move, Bushy steps in and removes the walnut $k$ from the hole. Observe that from what we assumed, a vacant hole cannot become occupied with walnut and vice versa.

After Bushy removes the walnut $1$, the remaining walnuts become a single contiguous segment of $2020$ walnuts, which is even. Therefore, when a walnut is removed from this segment, it will be split into an odd and an even segment; we keep our eyes on this even segment. Considering this even segment further, we see that it will eventually be divided to a smaller even segment. Thus, by repeating this argument, eventually, we will get a segment of length $2$ that Bushy cannot take away any either walnut, a contradiction.
This post has been edited 2 times. Last edited by MarkBcc168, Jul 21, 2021, 10:42 PM
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
Richangles
139 posts
#11 • 2 Y
Y by centslordm, cubres
I expected this problem to be NT, since P1 was either Algebra or combo. So has the PSC dropped the method of P1, P2, P4 & P5 being a permutation of A, C, G & N?
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
jasperE3
11334 posts
#12 • 3 Y
Y by centslordm, eggymath, cubres
No, P1 was NT.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
megarnie
5608 posts
#13 • 4 Y
Y by centslordm, Han-htr, eggymath, cubres
Solution
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
554183
484 posts
#14 • 3 Y
Y by centslordm, eggymath, cubres
Wu
On the $k$th move, color walnut $k$ black, and let the other walnuts remain brown. We count the number of pairs of adjacent black walnuts. It’s easy to see that if the opposite is assumed, then the change in the quantity is even. But we require the quantity to become $2021$ which is odd at the end.
Z K Y
The post below has been deleted. Click to close.
This post has been deleted. Click here to see post.
starchan
1609 posts
#15 • 2 Y
Y by centslordm, cubres
Solution?
This post has been edited 1 time. Last edited by starchan, Jul 28, 2021, 9:52 AM
Reason: Fixed an error in my previous solution.
Z K Y
G
H
=
a