Let $n$ be a positive integer such that there exists a polynomial $P(x)$ over $\mathbb{Q}$ of degree $3n$ satisfying the conditions below: $$P(0) = P(3) = \ldots = P(3n) = 2\,,$$ $$P(1) = P(4) = \ldots= P(3n - 2) = 1\,,$$ $$P(2) = P(5) = \ldots = P(3n - 1) = 0\,,$$ and $$P(3n + 1) = 730\,.$$ Determine the value of $n$.
- 50,341
- 1,061
-
1Are you familiar with Lagrange interpolation? – Clement C. Feb 08 '14 at 14:38
-
No, I'm sure it has a pretty basic solution. Our textbook problems go from easy to difficult, and this is the last one. I was able to solve all the questions, but I'm stumped on this. – Niharika Feb 08 '14 at 14:40
-
If you write the Lagrange polynomial interpolating $P$ on the first $3n+1$ points, you get a (unique) polynomial $Q$ of degree $\leq 3n$ satisfying $Q(i)=a_i$ for $i\in{0,\dots,3n}$ — so $P=Q$. The extra condition on point $3n+1$ will constrain $n$. – Clement C. Feb 08 '14 at 14:43
-
This doesn't seem possible. It looks like $P(k+3) = P(k)$, so $P(3n+1) = P(3n-2) = 1$ which is inconsistent with $P(3n+1) = 730$. – Mitch Feb 08 '14 at 15:14
-
The values are congruent modulo 3; besides, the values for 0, 1, 2 are different. That can't be a coincidence... – vonbrand Feb 08 '14 at 15:22
-
@Mitch : You have $3n+1$ values of a polynomial of degree $3n$, which determines a unique polynomial $P$. But the identities you found do not hold ; $P(k+3) = P(k)$ cannot hold in general for all $k$ since otherwise $P(X)$ would have infinitely many roots, thus be zero. – Patrick Da Silva Feb 08 '14 at 15:51
-
My bad...I missed the '$P(x)$ is a polynomial of degree $3n$' – Mitch Feb 08 '14 at 21:26
3 Answers
The OP is equivalent to: given \begin{align} P(x)&=\sum_{i=0}^{3n} a_i x^i \tag{1}\label{1} ,\\ P(3i-2)&=1,\quad i=1,\cdots,n \tag{2}\label{2} ;\\ P(3i-1)&=0,\quad i=1,\cdots,n \tag{3}\label{3} ;\\ P(3i)&=2,\quad i=1,\cdots,n \tag{4}\label{4} ;\\ P(3n+1)&=730 \tag{5}\label{5} ;\\ P(0)&=2 \tag{6}\label{6} , \end{align}
determine $n$.
Conditions \eqref{2}-\eqref{5} define the system of $(3n+1)\times(3n+1)$ linear equations,
\begin{align}
Au&=v
\tag{7}\label{7}
,
\end{align}
where $A$ is
a special case of
the
$(3n+1)\times(3n+1)$
Vandermonde matrix
\begin{align} A&=\begin{bmatrix} 1&1&1&\dots &1 \\ 1&2^1&2^2&\dots &2^{3n} \\ 1&3^1&3^2&\dots &3^{3n} \\ \vdots &\vdots &\vdots &\ddots &\vdots \\ 1&(3n+1)^1&(3n+1)^2&\dots &(3n+1)^{3n}\\ \end{bmatrix} ,\\ \text{or }\quad A_{ij}&=(i+1)^{j} ,\quad i,j=0,\cdots,3n . \end{align}
$u$ is the vector of coefficients $a_i$ \begin{align} u&=[a_0,\cdots,a_{3n}]^{\mathsf{T}} , \end{align}
and the right-hand side of \eqref{7} is a vector of the form \begin{align} v&=[\underbrace{1,0,2,1,0,2,\cdots,1,0,2}_{3n},730]^{\mathsf{T}} ,\\ \text{or }\quad v_{3n}&=730 ,\\ v_{i}&= 2-(i+1\mod 3) ,\quad i=0,\cdots,3n-1 . \end{align}
It follows from the condition \eqref{6} that \begin{align} a_0&=2 , \end{align}
For any $n$ all the coefficients $a_i$ of $P(x)$, including $a_0$, can be found as the solution of \eqref{7}.
A quick test reveals that $a_0=2$ for $n=4$.
This is a log of Maxima session for the test:
(%i1) a[i,j]:=(i+1)^j$
(%i2) v[i]:=2-mod(i+1,3)$
(%i3) n:4$
(%i4) A:apply('matrix,makelist(makelist(a[i,j],j,0,3*n),i,0,3*n))$
(%i5) V:makelist(v[i],i,0,3*n)$
(%i6) V[3*n+1]:730$
(%i7) V;
(%o7) [1, 0, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 0, 2, 1, 0, 2, 730]
(%i8) a0=invert(A)[1] . V;
(%o8) a0 = 2
- 13,841
Let $\omega:=\exp\left(\frac{2\pi\text{i}}{3}\right)=\frac{-1+\sqrt{-3}}{2}$. Define $$\tau(z):=\left(\frac{1-\omega^2}{3}\right)z^2+\left(\frac{1-\omega}{3}\right)z+1\text{ for all }z\in\mathbb{C}\,.$$ Note that, for each $k\in\mathbb{Z}$, we have $$\tau(\omega^k)=\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} 2&\text{if }k\equiv0\pmod{3}\,,\\ 1&\text{if }k\equiv1\pmod{3}\,,\\ 0&\text{if }k\equiv2\pmod{3}\,. \end{array} \right.$$
It is well known (see also here) that, if $f(x)\in \mathbb{K}[x]$ is a polynomial over a field $\mathbb{K}$ of degree $d$, then $$\sum_{r=0}^{d+1}\,(-1)^r\,\binom{d+1}{r}\,f(x+r)\equiv 0\,.$$ From the result above, we have that $$\sum_{r=0}^{3n+1}\,(-1)^r\,\binom{3n+1}{r}\,P(r)=0\,.$$ Recall that $P(r)=\tau(\omega^r)$ for $r=0,1,2,\ldots,3n$, and $P(3n+1)=3^6+1=3^6+\tau(\omega^{3n+1})$. That is, $$\sum_{r=0}^{3n+1}\,(-1)^r\,\binom{3n+1}{r}\,\tau(\omega^r)=(-1)^{3n}\,3^6\,.$$ Ergo, $$\left(\frac{1-\omega^2}{3}\right)\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{3n+1}+\left(\frac{1-\omega}{3}\right)\left(1-\omega\right)^{3n+1}+1(1-1)^{3n+1}=(-1)^{3n}3^6\,.$$ Thus, $$2\,\text{Re}\left((1-\omega)^{3n+2}\right)=\left(1-\omega^2\right)^{3n+2}+\left(1-\omega\right)^{3n+2}=(-1)^{3n}3^7\,.$$ Since $1-\omega=\sqrt{-3}\,\omega^2$, we see that $$(1-\omega)^{3n+2}=\sqrt{-3}^{3n+2}\omega^{6n+4}=\sqrt{-3}^{3n+2}\omega\,.$$ Therefore, $$3^{\frac{3n+2}{2}}\,\text{Re}\left(\sqrt{-1}^{3n+2}\omega\right)=\text{Re}\left(\sqrt{-3}^{3n+2}\omega\right)=(-1)^{3n}\frac{3^7}{2}\,.$$ Since $\frac{1}{2}\leq \Big|\text{Re}\left(\sqrt{-1}^{3n+2}\omega\right)\Big|\leq\frac{\sqrt{3}}{2}$, we have that $$\frac{3^{\frac{3n+2}{2}}}{2}\leq \frac{3^7}{2} \leq \frac{3^{\frac{3n+3}{2}}}{2}\,.$$ Consequently, $$3n+2\leq 14\leq 3n+3\,.$$ This proves that $n=4$ is the only possibility. It is not difficult to see that $n=4$ indeed works.
- 50,341
-
hi there, forgive my ignorance but the identity directly following bit "It is well known that...", I've never seen before. Is this considered an elementary result? would you be able to link me to somewhere I can read about it? – Merk Zockerborg Jul 24 '18 at 05:56
-
1I have seen questions about this identity a few times on this site, but I can't find them. People who have done numerical methods are probably familiar with the identity. However, I can explain it to you. Basically, you start with the forward differencing operator $\Delta$ defined by $$\Delta f(x):=f(x+1)-f(x),.$$ This operator reduces the degree of a polynomial by $1$. Hence, if your polynomial $f(x)$ is of degree $d$, then $\Delta^{d+1}f(x)$ must be identically zero. You also have $$\Delta^df(x)=d!,F,,$$ where $F$ is the leading coefficient of $f$. – Batominovski Jul 24 '18 at 08:13
-
Actually, I don't know field K. It's not learned in high school. – Takahiro Waki Jul 29 '18 at 09:41
-
This is an elementary method. You only need to know a few things about complex numbers and polynomials, as well as the Binomial Theorem. Just because it is a complicated solution, it doesn't mean the solution isn't elementary. There are much more complicated problems for high schoolers than this. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 09:42
-
@TakahiroWaki The Nørlund–Rice Identity does not require any knowledge about fields. I only stated it so people know that it works over an arbitrary field. For whatever it's worth, just take $\mathbb{R}$ for $\mathbb{K}$ in this problem. Also, if you are a high school student who wants to learn advanced mathematics, it's your loss if you don't try to get yourself accustomed to notions like fields. Ignorance is not an excuse not to learn. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 09:47
-
-
@TakahiroWaki Then I am sorry for you. Apparently, you are not really here to learn. You want to know what you have already known. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 09:50
-
-
@TakahiroWaki What rule? And who ever claimed that this was a high school problem? Even if it is not for high school students, it would have been a perfectly fine choice for high ranked mathematical competitions amongst high schoolers, even with my solution as the official solution. Your refusal to learn more is sad. I am sorry, but your attitude proves that you are not cut out for mathematics. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 09:56
-
Sorry for your misunderstanding. True reason is that this is probably easy problem for undergraduate student. So answering with high view points is stupid. Again sorry, you should learn answering real-time question. – Takahiro Waki Jul 29 '18 at 10:03
-
@TakahiroWaki What do you mean by "real-time question"? I have competed in the IMO, and you know what? Everything goes. If you have been taught this, and even if it's advanced, then you can use it. And so what if I used advanced mathematics to solve a problem? And why is using advanced mathematics "stupid"? Who is the arrogant one here? You came in with the viewpoint that "only the solutions I like are good (i.e., non-stupid) solutions." Why don't you solve this problem the way you like it and post it here? – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 10:05
-
What is the reason you don't answer question which I don't know "the field K"? That is all your bad. Such a guy shouldn't come to this site. – Takahiro Waki Jul 29 '18 at 10:09
-
@TakahiroWaki I already said that $\mathbb{K}$ can be replaced by $\mathbb{R}$. Here is the quote from my second comment to your barrage of nonsenses: "For whatever it's worth, just take $\mathbb{R}$ for $\mathbb{K}$ in this problem." Did you read all of my replies to you? And why can't you use google to find out what a field is? Is it so hard to use your finger tips? Are you both physically and intellectually lazy? – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 10:10
-
I am worried about yourself. Because your messages are all violation on this site. – Takahiro Waki Jul 29 '18 at 10:52
-
@TakahiroWaki Feel free to report me. I still don't understand why you can't educate yourself about fields, if it's so important for you to know to understand my proof. It's not like the term field is so hard to find a definition for. And as I said, my proof does not require any knowledge about other fields, but $\mathbb{R}$, so you are blowing it out of proportion. I just don't tolerate lazy people. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 10:54
-
That is best message・・・, but still not good. I wonder who is bad when your answer include some critical point for some user. This site doesn't distinguish high school contest and undergraduate contest. So now I notice every question include answer of different series. – Takahiro Waki Jul 29 '18 at 11:10
-
@TakahiroWaki I am not here to please you. I don't care about what you know and what you don't. If you don't know something, it is your responsibility to learn it. If you are refusing to learn it, you are the problem. Don't be so narcissistic that you demand that everybody should cater to your every need. – Batominovski Jul 29 '18 at 11:15
Define the polynomials $$ L_i(x) = \underset{j \neq i}{\prod_{0 \le j \le n}} \frac{(x-x_j)}{(x_i - x_j)} = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{ if } x = i \\ 0 & \text{ if } x = j \neq i \end{cases} $$ for each $i \in \{0,1,\cdots,3n\}$. It follows that since the $L_i$'s have degree $3n$, we have (I leave the computations up to you) : $$ P(x) = \sum_{i=0}^{3n} P(i) L_i(x) = \sum_{i=0}^n 2 (-1)^{n-i} \binom x{3i} \binom {x-(3i+1)}{3(n-i)} - \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (-1)^{n-i}\binom x{3i+1}\binom{x-(3i+2)}{3(n-i)-1}. $$ You can evaluate $P(3n+1)$ for a long range using a computer (the notation $\binom xi = x(x-1)\cdots(x-(i-1))/i!$ implies that $\binom xi (n) = \binom ni$ for positive integers). In other words, you are looking for $n$ such that $$ 730 = P(3n+1) = 2 \sum_{i=0}^n (-1)^{n-i} \binom{3n+1}{3i} - \sum_{i=0}^{n-1} (-1)^{n-i} \binom{3n+1}{3i+1} \\ = \sum_{i=0}^n \left( (-1)^{n-i} \left[ 2\binom{3n+1}{3i} - \binom{3n+1}{3i+1} \right] \right) $$
Hope that helps,
- 42,548
-
I believe everything is okay now. I am really troubled though, because the last sum always seems to be of the form $(-1)^{s(n)} 3^{f(n)} + 1$ where $f(n)$ and $s(n)$ are integers. – Patrick Da Silva Feb 08 '14 at 15:46
-