Difference between revisions of "1969 IMO Problems/Problem 2"
Line 34: | Line 34: | ||
Do the proof for the slightly more general function | Do the proof for the slightly more general function | ||
− | <math>f(x) = b_1\cos{(a_1 + x)} + b_1\cos{(a_1 + x)} + \cdots + b_n\cos{(a_n + x)}</math> | + | <math>f(x) = b_1\cos{(a_1 + x)} + b_1\cos{(a_1 + x)} + \cdots + b_n\cos{(a_n + x)}</math>. |
+ | We assume that <math>b_k \ne 0</math>, and no two of them are equal. (This is where we | ||
+ | make use of the fact that in the problem <math>b_k = 1/2^{k - 1}</math>.) It follows that | ||
+ | the function <math>f(x)</math> is not identical to <math>0</math>. | ||
− | + | Start by using the formula | |
<math>\cos{(\alpha + \beta)} = \cos{\alpha}\cos{\beta} - \sin{\alpha}\sin{\beta}</math>. | <math>\cos{(\alpha + \beta)} = \cos{\alpha}\cos{\beta} - \sin{\alpha}\sin{\beta}</math>. | ||
Line 43: | Line 46: | ||
(b_1\sin{a_1} + b_2\sin{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\sin{a_n})\sin{x}</math>. | (b_1\sin{a_1} + b_2\sin{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\sin{a_n})\sin{x}</math>. | ||
+ | If both <math>b_1\sin{a_1} + b_2\sin{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\sin{a_n} = 0</math> | ||
+ | and <math>b_1\cos{a_1} + b_2\cos{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\cos{a_n} = 0</math> then | ||
+ | <math>f(x) = 0</math> for all <math>x</math>. So at least one of these sums is <math>\ne 0</math>. | ||
+ | I will give the proof for the case | ||
+ | <math>b_1\cos{a_1} + b_2\cos{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\cos{a_n} \ne 0</math>. | ||
+ | The other case is proven similarly. | ||
+ | |||
Using <math>f(x_1) = 0</math>, we get | Using <math>f(x_1) = 0</math>, we get | ||
<math>(b_1\cos{a_1} + b_2\cos{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\cos{a_n})\cos{x_1} = | <math>(b_1\cos{a_1} + b_2\cos{a_2} + \cdots + b_n\cos{a_n})\cos{x_1} = | ||
Line 63: | Line 73: | ||
to conclude that <math>x_1 - x_2 = m\pi</math> for some integer <math>m</math>. If we want | to conclude that <math>x_1 - x_2 = m\pi</math> for some integer <math>m</math>. If we want | ||
to be more formal, we proceed by writing <math>\tan{x_1} - \tan{x_2} = 0</math>. | to be more formal, we proceed by writing <math>\tan{x_1} - \tan{x_2} = 0</math>. | ||
− | + | Some easy computations yield | |
− | {\cos{x_1}\cos{x_2}} = 0</math>. | + | <math>\tan{x_1} - \tan{x_2} = \frac{\sin{(x_1 - x_2)}} {\cos{x_1}\cos{x_2}} = 0</math>. |
− | which implies that <math>x_1 - x_2 = m\pi</math> for some integer <math>m</math> | + | It follows that <math>\sin{(x_1 - x_2)} = 0</math>, which implies that |
− | + | <math>x_1 - x_2 = m\pi</math> for some integer <math>m</math>. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
{{IMO box|year=1969|num-b=1|num-a=3}} | {{IMO box|year=1969|num-b=1|num-a=3}} |
Revision as of 18:05, 8 August 2024
Contents
Problem
Let be real constants, a real variable, and Given that prove that for some integer
Solution
Because the period of is , the period of is also . We can get for . Thus, for some integer
Solution 2 (longer)
By the cosine addition formula, This implies that if , Since the period of is , this means that for any natural number . That implies that every value is a zero of .
Remarks (added by pf02, August 2024)
Both solutions given above are incorrect.
The first solution is hopelessly incorrect. It states that (and relies on it) if has period and then for some integer . This is plainly wrong (think of ). There is an obvious "red flag" as far as solutions go, namely the solution did not use that and .
The second solution starts promising, but then it goes on to prove the converse of the given problem, namely that if then for any .
Below, I will give a solution to the problem. I feel a little uneasy about it, it has an "orange flag", namely I make no use of the fact that the coefficients if are the given powers of .
Solution
Do the proof for the slightly more general function . We assume that , and no two of them are equal. (This is where we make use of the fact that in the problem .) It follows that the function is not identical to .
Start by using the formula .
We get .
If both and then for all . So at least one of these sums is . I will give the proof for the case . The other case is proven similarly.
Using , we get , and similarly for .
If , then and . It follows that both and are odd multiples of , so they differ by for some integer .
If , then we can divide by this quantity, and we get
.
Thinking of the graph of would be enough for many people to conclude that for some integer . If we want to be more formal, we proceed by writing . Some easy computations yield . It follows that , which implies that for some integer .
See Also
1969 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 1 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 3 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |