Pure plane geometry problems for RMO training or practice

Similar Figures:

Definition:

Polygons which are equiangular and have their corresponding sides proportional are called similar.

If, in addition, their corresponding sides are parallel, they are said to be similarly situated or homothetic.

Theorem 1:

If O is any fixed point and ABCD…X any polygon, and if points A^{'}, B^{'}, C^{'}, \ldots X^{'} are taken on OA, OB, OC, …OX (or those lines produced either way) such that \frac{OA^{'}}{OA} = \frac{OB^{'}}{OB} = \ldots = \frac{OX^{'}}{OX}, then the polygons ABCD...X and A^{'}B^{'}C^{'} \ldots X^{'} are homothetic.

Before we state the next theorem, some background is necessary.

If O is a fixed point and P is a variable point on a fixed curve S, and if P^{'} is a point on OP such that \frac{OP^{'}}{OP} = k, a constant, then the locus of P^{'} is a curve S^{'}, which is said to be homothetic to S; and P, P^{'} are corresponding points.

O is called the centre of similitude of the two figures.

If P and P^{'} lie on the same side of O, the figures are said to be directly homothetic w.r.t.O, and O is called the external centre of similitude.

If P and P^{'} lie on the opposite sides of O, the figures are said to be inversely homothetic w.r.t. O, and O is called the internal centre of similitude.

If we join A and B in the first case, we say that the parallel lines AB, A^{'}B^{'} are drawn in the same sense, and in the second case, in opposite senses.

Theorem 2:

Let A, B be the centres of any two circles of radii a, b; AB is divided externally at O and internally at O_{1} in the ratio of the radii, that is, \frac{AO}{BO} = \frac{AO_{1}}{O_{1}B} = \frac{a}{b} then the circles are directly homothetic w.r.t. O and inversely homothetic w.r.t. O_{2}, and corresponding points lie on the extremities of parallel radii.

Now, prove the above two hard core basic geometry facts. ! 🙂 🙂 🙂 

Cheers,

Nalin Pithwa.

Some number theory training questions: RMO and INMO

Question 1:

Let us write an arbitrary natural number (for example, 2583), and then add the squares of its digits. (2^{2}+5^{2}+8^{2}+3^{2}=102). Next, we do the same thing to the number obtained. Namely, 1^{2}+0^{2}+2^{2}=5. Now proceed further in the same way:

5^{2}=25, 2^{2}+5^{2}=29, 2^{2}+9^{2}=85, \ldots.

Prove that unless this procedure leads to number 1 (in which case, the number 1 will, of course, recur indefinitely), it must lead to the number 145, and the following cycle will repeat again and again:

145, 42, 20, 4, 16, 37, 58, 89.

Question 2:

Prove that the number 5^{5k+1} + 4^{5k+2} + 3^{5k} is divisible by 11 for every natural k.

Question 3:

The number 3^{105} + 4^{105} is divisible by 13, 49, 181 and 379, and is not divisible by either 5 or by 11. How can this result be confirmed?

Cheers,

Nalin Pithwa.

Some basics of Number Theory for RMO: part III: Fermat’s Little Theorem

Fermat’s Little Theorem:

The fact that there are only a finite number of essentially different numbers in arithmetic to a modulus m means that there are algebraic relations which are satisfied by every number in that arithmetic. There is nothing analogous to these relations in ordinary arithmetic.

Suppose we take any number x and consider its powers x, x^{2}, x^{3}, \ldots. Since there are only a finite number of possibilities of these to the modulus m, we must eventually come to one which we have met before, say x^{h} \equiv x^{k} {\pmod m}, where k <h. If x is relatively prime to m, the factor x^{k} can be cancelled, and it follows that x^{l} \equiv 1 {\pmod m}, where l \equiv {h-k}. Hence, every number x which is relatively prime to m satisfies some congruence of this form. The least exponent l for which x^{l} \equiv 1 {\pmod m} will be called the order of x to the modulus m. If x is 1, its order is obviously 1. To illustrate the definition, let us calculate the orders of a few numbers to the modulus 11. The powers of 2, taken to the modulus 11, are

2, 4, 8, 5, 10, 9, 7, 3, 6, 1, 2, 4, \ldots

Each one is twice the preceding one, with 11 or a multiple of 11 subtracted where necessary to make the result less than 11. The first power of 2 which is \equiv 1 is 2^{10}, and so the order of 2 \pmod {11} is 10. As another example, take the powers of 3:

3, 9, 5, 4, 1, 3, 9, \ldots

The first power of 3 which is equivalent to 1 is 3^{5}, so the order of 3 \pmod {11} is 5. It will be found that the order of 4 is again 5, and so also is that of 5.

It will be seen that the successive powers of x are periodic; when we have reached the first number l for which x^{l} \equiv 1, then x^{l+1} \equiv x and the previous cycle is repeated. It is plain that x^{n} \equiv 1 {\pmod m} if and only if n is a multiple of the order of x. In the last example, 3^{n} \equiv 1 {\pmod 11} if and only if n is a multiple of 5. This remains valid if n is 0 (since 3^{0} = 1), and it remains valid also for negative exponents, provided 3^{-n}, is interpreted as a fraction (mod 11) in the way explained earlier (an earlier blog article).

In fact, the negative powers of 3 (mod 11) are obtained by prolonging the series backwards, and the table of powers of 3 to the modulus 11 is:

\begin{array}{cccccccccccccc}    n & = & \ldots & -3 & -2 & -1 & 0 & 1 &2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & \ldots \\    3^{n} & \equiv & \ldots & 9 & 5 & 4 & 1 & 3 & 9 & 5 & 4 & 1 & 3 & \ldots \end{array}

Fermat discovered that if the modulus is a prime, say p, then every integer x not congruent to 0 satisfies

x^{p-1} \equiv 1 {\pmod p}….call this as equation A.

In view of what we have seen above, this is equivalent to saying that the order of any number is a divisor of p-1. The result A was mentioned by Fermat in a letter to Frenicle de Bessy of 18 October 1640, in which he also stated that he had a proof. But, as with most of Fermat’s discoveries, the proof was not published or preserved. The first known proof seems to have been given by Leibniz (1646-1716). He proved that x^{p} \equiv x {\pmod p}, which is equivalent to A, by writing x as a sum 1+ 1 + 1 + \ldots + 1 of x units (assuming x positive), and then expanding (1+1+ \ldots + 1)^{p} by the multinomial theorem. The terms 1^{p} + 1^{p} + \ldots + 1^{p} give x, and the coefficients of all the other terms are easily proved to be divisible by p.

Quite a different proof was given by Ivory in 1806. If x \not\equiv 0 {\pmod p}, the integers

x, 2x, 3x, \ldots, (p-1)x

are congruent in some order to the numbers

1, 2, 3, \ldots, p-1.

In fact, each of these sets constitutes a complete set of residues except that 0 (zero) has been omitted from each. Since the two sets are congruent, their products are congruent, and so

(x)(2x)(3x) \ldots ((p-1)x) \equiv (1)(2)(3)\ldots (p-1){(\pmod p)}

Cancelling the factors 2, 3, ….(p-1), as is permissible we obtain the above relation A.

One merit of this proof is that it can be extended so as to apply to the more general case when the modulus is no longer a prime.

The generalization of the result A to any modulus was first given by Euler in 1760. To formulate it, we must begin by considering how many numbers in the set 0, 1, 2, …, (m-1) are relatively prime to m. Denote this number by \phi(m). When m is a prime, all the numbers in the set except 0 (zero) are relatively prime to m, so that \phi(p) = p-1 for any prime p. Euler’s generalization of Fermat’s theorem is that for any modulus m,

x^{\phi(m)} = 1 {\pmod m}…relation B

provided only that x is relatively prime to m.

To prove this, it is only necessary to modify Ivory’s method by omitting from the numbers 0, 1, 2, \ldots, (m-1) not only the number 0, but all numbers which are not relatively prime to m. These remain \phi(m) numbers, say

a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots, a_{\mu}, where \mu = \phi(m).

Then, the numbers

a_{1}x, a_{2}x, \ldots, a_{\mu}x

are congruent, in some order, to the previous numbers, and on multiplying and cancelling a_{1}, a_{2}, \ldots, a_{\mu} (as is permissible) we obtain x^{p} \equiv 1 {\pmod m}, which is relation B.

To illustrate this proof, take m=20. The numbers less than 20 and relatively prime to 20 are :

1, 3, 7, 9, 11, 13, 17, 19.

So that \phi(20) = 8. If we multiply these by any number x which is relatively prime to 20, the new numbers are congruent to the original numbers in some other order. For example, if x is 3, the new numbers are congruent respectively to

3, 9, 1, 7, 13, 19, 11, 17 {\pmod 20};

and the argument proves that 3^{8} \equiv 6561.

Reference:

  1. The Higher Arithmetic, H. Davenport, Eighth Edition.
  2. Elementary Number Theory, Burton, Sixth Edition.
  3. A Friendly Introduction to Number Theory, J. Silverman

Shared for those readers who enjoy expository articles.

Nalin Pithwa.

Practice questions based on combinatorics for RMO Training and IITJEE Mathematics

Question 1:

Prove that if n is an even integer, then

\frac{1}{(1!)(n-1)!} + \frac{1}{3! (n-3)!} + \frac{1}{5! (n-5)!} + \ldots + \frac{1}{(n-1)! 1!} = \frac{2^{n-1}}{n!}

Question 2:

If {n \choose 0}, {n \choose 1}, {n \choose 2}, ….{n \choose n} are the coefficients in the expansion of (1+x)^{n}, when n is a positive integer, prove that

(a) {n \choose 0} - {n \choose 1}  + {n \choose 2} - {n \choose 3} + \ldots + (-1)^{r}{n \choose r} = (-1)^{r}\frac{(n-1)!}{r! (n-r-1)!}

(b) {n \choose 0} - 2{n \choose 1} + 3{n \choose 2} - 4{n \choose 3} + \ldots + (-1)^{n}(n+1){n \choose n}=0

(c) {n \choose 0}^{2} - {n \choose 1}^{2} + {n \choose 2}^{2} - {n \choose 3}^{2} + \ldots + (-1)^{n}{n \choose n}^{2}=0, or (-1)^{\frac{n}{2}}{n \choose {n/2}}, according as n is odd or even.

Question 3:

If s_{n} denotes the sum of the first n natural numbers, prove that

(a) (1-x)^{-3}=s_{1}+s_{2}x+s_{3}x^{2}+\ldots + s_{n}x^{n-1}+\ldots

(b) 2(s_{1}s_{2m} + s_{2}s_{2n-1} + \ldots + s_{n}s_{n+1}) = \frac{2n+4}{5! (2n-1)!}

Question 4:

If q_{n}=\frac{1.3.5.7...(2n-1)}{2.4.6.8...2n}, prove that

(a) q_{2n+1}+q_{1}q_{2n}+ q_{2}q_{2n-1} + \ldots + q_{n-1}q_{n+2} + q_{n}q_{n+1}= \frac{1}{2}

(b) 2(q_{2n}-q_{1}q_{2m-1}+q_{2}q_{2m-2}+\ldots + (-1)^{m}q_{m-1}q_{m+1}) = q_{n} + (-1)^{n-1}{q_{n}}^{2}.

Question 5:

Find the sum of the products, two at a time, of the coefficients in the expansion of (1+x)^{n}, where n is a positive integer.

Question 6:

If (7+4\sqrt{3})^{n} = p + \beta, where n and p are positive integers, and \beta, a proper fraction, show that (1-\beta)(p+\beta)=1.

Question 7:

If {n \choose 0}, {n \choose 1}, {n \choose 2}, …,, {n \choose n} are the coefficients in the expansion of (1+x)^{n}, where n is a positive integer, show that

{n \choose 1} - \frac{{n \choose 2}}{2} + \frac{{n \choose 3}}{3} - \ldots + \frac{(-1)^{n-1}{n \choose n}}{n} = 1 + \frac{1}{2} + \frac {1}{3} + \frac{1}{4} + \ldots + \frac{1}{n}.

That’s all for today, folks!

Nalin Pithwa.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Combinatorics for RMO : some basics and examples: homogeneous products of r dimensions

Question:

Find the number of homogeneous products of r dimensions that can be formed out of the n letters a, b, c ….and their powers.

Solution:

By division, or by the binomial theorem, we have:

\frac{1}{1-ax} = 1 + ax + a^{2}x^{2} + a^{3}x^{3} + \ldots

\frac{1}{1-bx} = 1+ bx + b^{2}x^{2} + a^{3}x^{3} + \ldots

\frac{1}{1-cx} = 1 + cx + c^{2}x^{2} + c^{3}x^{3} + \ldots

Hence, by multiplication,

\frac{1}{1-ax} \times \frac{1}{1-bx} \times \frac{1}{1-cx} \times \ldots

= (1+ax + a^{2}x^{2}+a^{3}x^{3}+ \ldots)(1+bx + b^{2}x^{2} + b^{3}x^{3}+ \ldots)(1+cx + c^{2}x^{2} + c^{3}x^{3}+ \ldots)\ldots

= 1 + x(a + b + c + \ldots) +x^{2}(a^{2}+ab+ac+b^{2}+bc + c^{2} + \ldots) + \ldots

= 1 + S_{1}x + S_{2}x^{2} + S_{3}x^{3} + \ldots suppose;

where S_{1}, S_{2}, S_{3}, \ldots are the sums of the homogeneous products of one, two, three, … dimensions that can be formed of a, b, c, …and their powers.

To obtain the number of these products, put a, b, c, …each equal to 1; each term in S_{1}, S_{2}, S_{3}, …now becomes 1, and the values of S_{1}, S_{2}, S_{3}, …so obtained give the number of the homogeneous products of one, two, three, ….dimensions.

Also,

\frac{1}{1-ax} \times \frac{1}{1-bx} \times \frac{1}{1-cx} \ldots

becomes \frac{1}{(1-x)^{n}}, or (1-x)^{-n}

Hence, S_{r} = the coefficient of x^{r} in the expansion of (1-x)^{-n}

= \frac{n(n+1)(n+2)(n+3)\ldots (n+r-1)}{r!}= \frac{(n+r-1)!}{r!(n-1)!}

Question:

Find the number of terms in the expansion of any multinomial when the index is a positive integer.

Answer:

In the expansion of (a_{1}+ a_{2} + a_{3} + \ldots + a_{r})^{n}

every term is of n dimensions; therefore, the number of terms is the same as the number of homogeneous products of n dimensions that can be formed out of the r quantities a_{1}, a_{2}, a_{3}, …a_{r}, and their powers; and therefore by the preceding question and solution, this is equal to

\frac{(r+n-1)!}{n! (r-1)!}

A theorem in combinatorics:

From the previous discussion in this blog article, we can deduce a theorem relating to the number of combinations of n things.

Consider n letters a, b, c, d, ….; then, if we were to write down all the homogeneous products of r dimensions, which can be formed of these letters and their powers, every such product would represent one of the combinations, r at a time, of the n letters, when any one of the letters might occur once, twice, thrice, …up to r times.

Therefore, the number of combinations of n things r at a time when repetitions are allowed is equal to the number of homogeneous products of r dimensions which can be formed out of n letters, and therefore equal to \frac{(n+r-1)!}{r!(n-1)!}, or {{n+r-1} \choose r}.

That is, the number of combinations of n things r at a time when repetitions are allowed is equal to the number of combinations of n+r-1 things r at a time when repetitions are NOT allowed.

We conclude this article with a few miscellaneous examples:

Example 1:

Find the coefficient of x^{r} in the expansion of \frac{(1-2x)^{2}}{(1+x)^{3}}

Solution 1:

The expression = (1-4x+4x^{2})(1+p_{1}x+p_{2}x^{2}+ \ldots + p_{r}x^{r}+ \ldots), suppose.

The coefficients of x^{r} will be obtained by multiplying p_{r}, p_{r-1}, p_{r-2} by 1, -4, and 4 respectively, and adding the results; hence,

the required coefficient is p_{r} - 4p_{r-1}+4p_{r-2}

But, with a little work, we can show that p_{r} = (-1)^{r}\frac{(r+1)(r+2)}{2}.

Hence, the required coefficient is

= (-1)^{r}\frac{(r+1)(r+2)}{2} - 4(-1)^{r-1}\frac{r(r+1)}{2} + 4 (-1)^{r-2}\frac{r(r-1)}{2}

= \frac{(-1)^{r}}{2}\times ((r+1)(r+2) + 4r(r+1) + 4r(r-1))

= \frac{(-1)^{r}}{2}(9r^{2}+3r+2)

Example 2:

Find the value of the series

2 + \frac{5}{(2!).3} + \frac{5.7}{3^{2}.(3!)} + \frac{5.7.9}{3^{3}.(4!)} + \ldots

Solution 2:

The expression is equal to

2 + \frac{3.5}{2!}\times \frac{1}{3^{2}} + \frac{3.5.7}{3!}\times \frac{1}{3^{3}} + \frac{3.5.7.9}{4!}\times \frac{1}{3^{4}} + \ldots

= 2 + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}}{2!} \times \frac{2^{2}}{3^{2}} + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}.\frac{7}{2}}{3!} \times \frac{2^{3}}{3^{3}} + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}.\frac{7}{2}.\frac{9}{2}}{4!} \times \frac{2^{4}}{3^{4}} + \ldots

= 1 + \frac{\frac{3}{2}}{1} \times \frac{2}{3} + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}}{2!} \times (\frac{2}{3})^{2} + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}.\frac{7}{2}}{3!} \times (\frac{2}{3})^{3} + \frac{\frac{3}{2}.\frac{5}{2}.\frac{7}{2}.\frac{9}{2}}{4!} \times (\frac{2}{3})^{4} + \ldots

= (1-\frac{2}{3})^{\frac{-3}{2}} = (\frac{1}{3})^{-\frac{3}{2}} = 3^{\frac{3}{2}} = 3 \sqrt{3}.

Example 3:

If n is any positive integer, show that the integral part of (3+\sqrt{7})^{n} is an odd number.

Solution 3:

Suppose I to denote the integral and f the fractional part of (3+\sqrt{7})^{n}.

Then, I + f = 3^{n} + {n \choose 1}3^{n-1}\sqrt{7} + {n \choose 2}3^{n-2}.7 + {n \choose 3}3^{n-3}.(\sqrt{7})^{3}+ \ldots…call this relation 1.

Now, 3 - \sqrt{7} is positive and less than 1, therefore (3-\sqrt{7})^{n} is a proper fraction; denote it by f^{'};

Hence, f^{'} = 3^{n} - {n \choose 1}.3^{n-1}.\sqrt{7} + {n \choose 2}.3^{n-2}.7 - {n \choose 3}.3^{n-3}.(\sqrt{7})^{3}+ \ldots…call this as relation 2.

Add together relations 1 and 2; the irrational terms disappear, and we have

I + f + f^{'} = 2(3^{n} + {n \choose 2}.3^{n-2}.7+ \ldots ) = an even integer

But, since f and f^{'} are proper fractions their sum must be 1;

Hence, I is an odd integer.

Hope you had fun,

Nalin Pithwa.

Some basics of RMO Number Theory: II. Linear Congruences

II. Linear congruences:

It is obvious that every integer is congruent (mod m) to exactly one of the numbers:

0, 1, 2, 3, 4, …, (m-1). ——- Note 1.

For, we can express the integer in the form qm+r, where 0 \leq r <m, and then, it is congruent to r {\pmod m}. Obviously, there are other sets of numbers, besides the set in Note 1, which have the same property, e.g., any integer is congruent (mod 5) to exactly one of the numbers 0, 1, -1, 2, -2. Any such set of numbers is said to constitute a complete set of residues to the modulus m. Another way of expressing the definition is to say that a complete set of residues (mod m) is any set of m numbers, no two of which are congruent to one another.

A linear congruence, by analogy with a linear equation in elementary algebra, means a congruence of the form

ax \equiv b {\pmod m} —- Note 2.

It is an important fact that any such congruence is soluble for x, provided that a is relatively prime to m. The simplest way of proving this is to observe that if x runs through the numbers of a complete set of residues, then the corresponding values of ax also constitute a complete set of residues. For there are m of these numbers, and no two of them are congruent, since ax_{1} \equiv ax_{2} {\pmod m} would involve x_{1} \equiv x_{2} {\pmod m}, by the cancellation of the factor a (permissible since a is relatively prime to m). Since the numbers ax form a complete set of residues, there will be exactly one of them congruent to the given number b.

As an example, consider the congruence 3x \equiv 5 {\pmod {11}},

If we give x the values 0, 1, 2, …, 10 (a complete set of residues to the modulus 11), 3x takes the values 0, 3, 6, …30. These form another complete set of residues (mod 11), and in fact, they are congruent respectively to

0, 3, 6, 9, 1, 4, 7, 10, 2, 5, 8.

The value 5 occurs when x=9, and so x=9 is a solution of the congruence. Naturally, any number congruent to 9 (mod 11) will also satisfy the congruence; but, nevertheless, we say that the congruence has one solution, meaning that there is one solution in any complete set of residues. In other words, all solutions are mutually congruent. The same applies to the general congruence (Note 2); such a congruence (provided that a is relatively prime to m) is precisely equivalent to the congruence x \equiv x_{0} {\pmod m}, where x_{0} is one particular solution.

There is another way of looking at the linear congruence (in note 2). It is equivalent to the equation ax = b + my, or ax - my =b. It can be proved that such a linear diophantine equation is soluble for x and y if a and m are relatively prime, and that fact provides another proof of the existence of a solution of linear congruence. But, the proof given above is simpler, and illustrates the advant4ages gained by using the congruence notation.

The fact that the congruence (in note 2) has a unique solution, in the sense explained above, suggests that one may use this solution as an interpretation for the fraction \frac{b}{a} to the modulus m. When we do this, we obtain an arithmetic (mod m) in which addition, subtraction and multiplication are always possible, and division is also possible if the divisor is relatively prime to m. In this arithmetic there are only a finite number of essentially distinct numbers, namely m of them, since two numbers which are mutually congruent (mod m) are treated as the same. If we take the modulus m to be 11, as an illustration, a few examples of “arithmetic mod 11” are :

5 + 7 \equiv 1; 5 \times 6 \equiv 8; \frac{5}{3} \equiv 9 \equiv -2.

Any relation connecting integers or fractions in the ordinary sense remains true when interpreted in this arithmetic. For example, the relation \frac{1}{2} + \frac{2}{3} = \frac{7}{6}

becomes (mod 11)

6 + 8 \equiv 3,

because the solution of 2x \equiv 1 is x \equiv 6, that of 3x \equiv 2 is x \equiv 8, and that of 6x \equiv 7 is x \equiv 3. Naturally the interpretation given to a fraction depends on the modulus, for instance \frac{2}{3} = 8 {\pmod 11}, but \frac{2}{3} \equiv 3 {\pmod 7}. The only limitation on such calculations is that just mentioned, namely that the denominator of any fraction must be relatively prime to the modulus. If the modulus is a prime (as in the above examples with 11), the limitation takes the very simple form that the denominator must not be congruent to 0 (mod m), and this is exactly analogous to the limitation in ordinary arithmetic that the denominator must not be equal to 0. We will say more about this later.

Reference: The Higher Arithmetic, H. Davenport, 8th edition.

Shared for my students/readers who love to read expository articles….

Regards,

Nalin Pithwa.