1 |
dashley |
140 |
%$Header$ |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
\chapter[\cmtnzeroshorttitle{}]{\cmtnzerolongtitle{}} |
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
\label{cmtn0} |
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
\beginchapterquote{``If intellectual curiosity, professional pride, and ambition are |
8 |
|
|
the dominant incentives to research, then assuredly no one has |
9 |
|
|
a fairer chance of gratifying them than a mathematician. His |
10 |
|
|
subject is the most curious of all---there is none in which |
11 |
|
|
truth plays such odd pranks. It has the most elaborate |
12 |
|
|
and the most fascinating technique, and gives unrivaled |
13 |
|
|
openings for the display of sheer professional skill. Finally, |
14 |
|
|
as history proves abundantly, mathematical achievement, whatever |
15 |
|
|
its intrinsic worth, is the most enduring |
16 |
|
|
of all.''} |
17 |
|
|
{G.H. Hardy \cite{bibref:b:mathematiciansapology:1940}} |
18 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
\section{Introduction} |
20 |
|
|
%Section Tag: INT0 |
21 |
|
|
\label{cmtn0:sint0} |
22 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
25 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
26 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
27 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
\index{floor function@floor function ($\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$)}% |
29 |
|
|
\index{--@$\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$ (\emph{floor($\cdot$)} function)}% |
30 |
|
|
\index{ceiling function@ceiling function ($\lceil\cdot\rceil$)}% |
31 |
|
|
\index{--@$\lceil\cdot\rceil$ (\emph{ceiling($\cdot$)} function)}% |
32 |
|
|
\section{The Floor \mbox{\boldmath $\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$} And Ceiling \mbox{\boldmath $\lceil\cdot\rceil$} Functions} |
33 |
|
|
\label{cmtn0:sfcf0} |
34 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
The \emph{floor} function, denoted $\lfloor\cdot\rfloor$, is defined to return |
36 |
|
|
the largest integer not larger than the argument. For example, |
37 |
|
|
$\lfloor 3 \rfloor = \lfloor 3.9999 \rfloor = 3$. For negative arguments, the definition |
38 |
|
|
is identical: $\lfloor -4 \rfloor = \lfloor -3.9 \rfloor = -4$. |
39 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
The \emph{ceiling} function, denoted $\lceil\cdot\rceil$, is defined to return |
41 |
|
|
the smallest integer not less than the argument. For example, |
42 |
|
|
$\lceil 3.0001 \rceil = \lceil 4 \rceil = 4$. For negative arguments, the definition |
43 |
|
|
is identical: $\lceil -4 \rceil = \lceil -4.9 \rceil = -4$. |
44 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
Note that the definitions presented above for negative arguments |
46 |
|
|
differ from what is commonly implemented in spreadsheet software and other consumer |
47 |
|
|
software. |
48 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
It can be verfied easily that for |
50 |
|
|
$a \in \vworkintsetnonneg$, $b \in \vworkintsetpos$, |
51 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
53 |
|
|
\label{eq:cmtn0:sfcf0:01} |
54 |
|
|
\frac{a}{b} = \left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor + \frac{a \bmod b}{b} |
55 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
56 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
\noindent{}and consequently that |
58 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
60 |
|
|
\label{eq:cmtn0:sfcf0:02} |
61 |
|
|
\left\lfloor\frac{a}{b}\right\rfloor = \frac{a}{b} - \frac{a \bmod b}{b} . |
62 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
63 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
\noindent{}(\ref{eq:cmtn0:sfcf0:02}) is a very useful identity for |
65 |
|
|
decomposing expressions involving the \emph{floor($\cdot$)} function. |
66 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
\section{Tests For Divisibility Of Integers} |
68 |
|
|
%Section Tag: TDI0 |
69 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
71 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
72 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
73 |
|
|
\subsection{Tests For Divisibility By 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, And 11} |
74 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
It is often useful to be able to inspect a radix-10 integer and quickly |
76 |
|
|
determine if it can be divided by a small prime number. This section |
77 |
|
|
presents tests which can be used to easily determine divisibility by |
78 |
|
|
2, 3, 5, 7, and 11. |
79 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0002@by 2} |
81 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 2. |
82 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0003@by 3} |
84 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 3. |
85 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0005@by 5} |
87 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 5. |
88 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0007@by 7} |
90 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 7. |
91 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0011@by 11} |
93 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 11. |
94 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
97 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
98 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
99 |
|
|
\subsection{Tests For Divisibility By 2$^N$, 6, 9, And 10$^N$} |
100 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0002N@by 2$^N$} |
102 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 2$^N$. |
103 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0006@by 6} |
105 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 6. |
106 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0009@by 9} |
108 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 9. |
109 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
Placeholder\index{divisibility tests for integers!by 0010N@by 10$^N$} |
111 |
|
|
reserved for divisibility by 10$^N$. |
112 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
\subsection{David G. Radcliffe's Proof: Rearrangement Of Digits Of $2^N$} |
115 |
|
|
%Subsection Tag: DGR0 |
116 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
In 07/00, Paul Harvey (\texttt{pharvey@derwent.co.uk}) made the following |
118 |
|
|
post to \texttt{sci.math} \cite{bibref:n:scimathnewsgroup}: |
119 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
\begin{quote} |
121 |
|
|
{I've got a little problem which is bugging me, perhaps someone out there |
122 |
|
|
can point me in the right direction \ldots{}} |
123 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
{Does there exist a positive integer which is a power of 2, whose digits can |
125 |
|
|
be rearranged to give a different power of 2?} |
126 |
|
|
\end{quote} |
127 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
David G. Radcliffe \cite{bibref:i:davidgradcliffe} |
129 |
|
|
responded with a beautiful proof, which is presented below |
130 |
|
|
as a theorem. |
131 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
\begin{vworktheoremstatement} |
133 |
|
|
No radix-10 positive integral power of 2 (i.e. 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, etc.), with |
134 |
|
|
any leading 0's removed, can be used |
135 |
|
|
to form another radix-10 positive integral power of 2 by simple rearrangement |
136 |
|
|
of the digits. |
137 |
|
|
\end{vworktheoremstatement} |
138 |
|
|
\begin{vworktheoremproof} |
139 |
|
|
Suppose that $x$ and $y$ are two different powers of 2, $y>x$, and that |
140 |
|
|
the digits of $x$ can be rearranged to form $y$. $y<10x$, since both |
141 |
|
|
$x$ and $y$ must have the same number of digits. Thus, there |
142 |
|
|
are three possibilities, $y=2x$, $y=4x$, or $y=8x$. |
143 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
Since $x$ and $y$ have the same digits, but in a different order, |
145 |
|
|
the sum of the digits of $x$ is equal to the sum of the digits of $y$. |
146 |
|
|
It follows that $y-x$ is divisible by 9. (This follows because |
147 |
|
|
the sum of the digits of an integer $i$, summing the intermediate |
148 |
|
|
sums as many times as necessary to yield a single-digit result, |
149 |
|
|
yield either 9 implying that $i \; mod \; 9 = 0$, or yielding $i \; mod \; 9$. |
150 |
|
|
If the digits of $x$ and $y$ are the same, |
151 |
|
|
the sums of their digits are the same, thus $(x \; mod \; 9) = (y \; mod \; 9)$, |
152 |
|
|
which implies that $((y-x) \; mod \; 9) = 0$, i.e. that $y-x$ is divisible |
153 |
|
|
by 9.) |
154 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
If $y \in \{ 2x, 4x, 8x \}$, then $y-x \in \{ x, 3x, 7x \}$. It would |
156 |
|
|
follow that $x$ is divisible by 3, a contradiction. |
157 |
|
|
\end{vworktheoremproof} |
158 |
|
|
\vworktheoremfooter{} |
159 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
161 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
162 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
163 |
|
|
\section{The Pigeonhole Principle} |
164 |
|
|
\label{cmtn0:sphp0} |
165 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
The \index{pigeonhole principle}\emph{pigeonhole principle} is a statement |
167 |
|
|
that if $m$ items are placed into $n$ slots, with $m > n$, then at least one |
168 |
|
|
slot will contain more than one item. This is also known as |
169 |
|
|
\index{Dirichlet's box principle}\emph{Dirichlet's box principle}. |
170 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
A related statement is that $m$ items are placed into $n$ slots, |
172 |
|
|
with $m < n$, then at least one |
173 |
|
|
slot will be empty. |
174 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
Despite its simplicity, the pigeonhole principle is the basis for many important |
176 |
|
|
proofs and observations in number theory. |
177 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
180 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
181 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
182 |
|
|
\section{Exercises} |
183 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
186 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
\noindent\begin{figure}[!b] |
188 |
|
|
\noindent\rule[-0.25in]{\textwidth}{1pt} |
189 |
|
|
\begin{tiny} |
190 |
|
|
\begin{verbatim} |
191 |
dashley |
278 |
$HeadURL$ |
192 |
|
|
$Revision$ |
193 |
|
|
$Date$ |
194 |
|
|
$Author$ |
195 |
dashley |
140 |
\end{verbatim} |
196 |
|
|
\end{tiny} |
197 |
|
|
\noindent\rule[0.25in]{\textwidth}{1pt} |
198 |
|
|
\end{figure} |
199 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% |
201 |
|
|
% |
202 |
|
|
%End of file C_MTN0.TEX |