Difference between revisions of "1987 IMO Problems/Problem 4"
m |
|||
(12 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Prove that there is no function <math>f </math> from the set of non-negative integers into itself such that <math>f(f(n)) = n + 1987 </math> for every <math>n </math>. | Prove that there is no function <math>f </math> from the set of non-negative integers into itself such that <math>f(f(n)) = n + 1987 </math> for every <math>n </math>. | ||
− | + | ==Solution 1 == | |
− | |||
We prove that if <math>f(f(n)) = n + k</math> for all <math>n</math>, where <math>k</math> is a fixed positive integer, then <math>k</math> must be even. If <math>k = 2h</math>, then we may take <math>f(n) = n + h</math>. | We prove that if <math>f(f(n)) = n + k</math> for all <math>n</math>, where <math>k</math> is a fixed positive integer, then <math>k</math> must be even. If <math>k = 2h</math>, then we may take <math>f(n) = n + h</math>. | ||
Line 10: | Line 9: | ||
So if <math>f(m) = n</math>, then <math>m</math> and <math>n</math> have different residues <math>\pmod k</math>. Suppose they have <math>r_1</math> and <math>r_2</math> respectively. Then the same induction shows that all sufficiently large <math>s \equiv r_1 \pmod k</math> have <math>f(s) \equiv r_2 \pmod k</math>, and that all sufficiently large <math>s \equiv r_2 \pmod k</math> have <math>f(s) \equiv r_1 \pmod k</math>. Hence if <math>m</math> has a different residue <math>r \mod k</math>, then <math>f(m)</math> cannot have residue <math>r_1</math> or <math>r_2</math>. For if <math>f(m)</math> had residue <math>r_1</math>, then the same argument would show that all sufficiently large numbers with residue <math>r_1</math> had <math>f(m) \equiv r \pmod k</math>. Thus the residues form pairs, so that if a number is congruent to a particular residue, then <math>f</math> of the number is congruent to the pair of the residue. But this is impossible for <math>k</math> odd. | So if <math>f(m) = n</math>, then <math>m</math> and <math>n</math> have different residues <math>\pmod k</math>. Suppose they have <math>r_1</math> and <math>r_2</math> respectively. Then the same induction shows that all sufficiently large <math>s \equiv r_1 \pmod k</math> have <math>f(s) \equiv r_2 \pmod k</math>, and that all sufficiently large <math>s \equiv r_2 \pmod k</math> have <math>f(s) \equiv r_1 \pmod k</math>. Hence if <math>m</math> has a different residue <math>r \mod k</math>, then <math>f(m)</math> cannot have residue <math>r_1</math> or <math>r_2</math>. For if <math>f(m)</math> had residue <math>r_1</math>, then the same argument would show that all sufficiently large numbers with residue <math>r_1</math> had <math>f(m) \equiv r \pmod k</math>. Thus the residues form pairs, so that if a number is congruent to a particular residue, then <math>f</math> of the number is congruent to the pair of the residue. But this is impossible for <math>k</math> odd. | ||
− | + | ==Solution 2 == | |
Solution by Sawa Pavlov: | Solution by Sawa Pavlov: | ||
− | Let <math>N</math> be the set of non-negative integers. Put <math>A = N - f(N)</math> (the set of all <math>n</math> such that we cannot find <math>m</math> with <math>f(m) = n</math>). Put <math>B = f(A)</math>. | + | Let <math>\mathbb{N}</math> be the set of non-negative integers. Put <math>A = \mathbb{N} - f(\mathbb{N})</math> (the set of all <math>n</math> such that we cannot find <math>m</math> with <math>f(m) = n</math>). Put <math>B = f(A)</math>. |
− | Note that <math>f</math> is injective because if <math>f(n) = f(m)</math>, then <math>f(f(n)) = f(f(m))</math> so <math>m = n</math>. We claim that <math>B = f(N) - f(f(N))</math>. Obviously <math>B</math> is a subset of <math>f(N)</math> and if <math>k</math> belongs to <math>B</math>, then it does not belong to <math>f(f(N))</math> since <math>f</math> is injective. Similarly, a member of <math>f(f(N))</math> cannot belong to <math>B</math>. | + | Note that <math>f</math> is injective because if <math>f(n) = f(m)</math>, then <math>f(f(n)) = f(f(m))</math> so <math>m = n</math>. We claim that <math>B = f(\mathbb{N}) - f(f(\mathbb{N}))</math>. Obviously <math>B</math> is a subset of <math>f(\mathbb{N})</math> and if <math>k</math> belongs to <math>B</math>, then it does not belong to <math>f(f(\mathbb{N}))</math> since <math>f</math> is injective. Similarly, a member of <math>f(f(\mathbb{N}))</math> cannot belong to <math>B</math>. |
− | Clearly <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> are disjoint. They have union <math>N - f(f(N))</math> which is <math>\{0, 1, 2, \ldots , 1986\}</math>. But since <math>f</math> is injective they have the same number of elements, which is impossible since <math>\{0, 1, \ldots , 1986\}</math> has an odd number of elements. | + | Clearly <math>A</math> and <math>B</math> are disjoint. They have union <math>\mathbb{N} - f(f(\mathbb{N}))</math> which is <math>\{0, 1, 2, \ldots , 1986\}</math>. But since <math>f</math> is injective they have the same number of elements, which is impossible since <math>\{0, 1, \ldots , 1986\}</math> has an odd number of elements. |
+ | |||
+ | ==Solution 3 == | ||
+ | |||
+ | Consider the function <math>g: \mathbb{Z}_{1987} \rightarrow \mathbb{Z}_{1987}</math> defined by <math>g(x) = f(x\; {\rm mod }\; 1987) \;{\rm mod }\; 1987</math>. Notice that we have <math>f(k) + 1987 = f(f(f(k))) = f(k + 1987)</math>, so that <math>f(x) = f(y) \;{\rm mod }\; 1987</math> whenever <math>x = y \;{\rm mod }\; 1987</math>, and hence <math>g</math> is well defined. | ||
+ | |||
+ | Now, we observe that <math>g</math> satisfies the identity <math>g(g(x)) = x</math>, for <math>x \in Z_{1987}</math>. Thus, <math>g</math> is an invertible function on a finite set of odd size, and hence must have a fixed point, say <math>a \in \mathbb{Z}_{1987}</math>. Identifying <math>a</math> with its canonical representative in <math>\mathbb{Z}</math>, we therefore get <math>f(a) = a + 1987k</math> for some non-negative integer <math>k</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | However, we then have <math>f(f(a)) = a + 1987</math>, while <math>f(f(a)) = f(a + 1987k) = 1987k + f(a) = 2\cdot1987k + a</math> (where we use the identity <math>f(x + 1987) = f(x) + 1987</math> derived above, along with <math>f(a) = f(a) + 1987</math>. However, these two equations imply that <math>k = \dfrac{1}{2}</math>, which is a contradiction since <math>k</math> is an integer. Thus, such an <math>f</math> cannot exist. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ''Note: The main step in the proof above is that the function <math>g</math> can be shown to have a fixed point. This step works even if 1987 is replaced with any other odd number larger than 1. However, for any even number <math>c</math>, <math>f(x) = x + \dfrac{c}{2}</math> satisfies the condition <math>f(f(x)) = x + c</math>. | ||
+ | |||
+ | --[[User:Mahamaya|<font color="#FF 69 B4">Maha</font><font color="#FF00FF">maya</font>]] 21:15, 21 May 2012 (EDT) | ||
{{IMO box|num-b=3|num-a=5|year=1987}} | {{IMO box|num-b=3|num-a=5|year=1987}} | ||
[[Category:Olympiad Algebra Problems]] | [[Category:Olympiad Algebra Problems]] | ||
+ | [[Category:Functional Equation Problems]] |
Latest revision as of 18:51, 21 January 2024
Contents
Problem
Prove that there is no function from the set of non-negative integers into itself such that for every .
Solution 1
We prove that if for all , where is a fixed positive integer, then must be even. If , then we may take .
Suppose with . Then by an easy induction on we find , . We show this leads to a contradiction. Suppose , so for some . Then . But , so . Contradiction. So we must have , so for some . But now . But , so . Contradiction.
So if , then and have different residues . Suppose they have and respectively. Then the same induction shows that all sufficiently large have , and that all sufficiently large have . Hence if has a different residue , then cannot have residue or . For if had residue , then the same argument would show that all sufficiently large numbers with residue had . Thus the residues form pairs, so that if a number is congruent to a particular residue, then of the number is congruent to the pair of the residue. But this is impossible for odd.
Solution 2
Solution by Sawa Pavlov:
Let be the set of non-negative integers. Put (the set of all such that we cannot find with ). Put .
Note that is injective because if , then so . We claim that . Obviously is a subset of and if belongs to , then it does not belong to since is injective. Similarly, a member of cannot belong to .
Clearly and are disjoint. They have union which is . But since is injective they have the same number of elements, which is impossible since has an odd number of elements.
Solution 3
Consider the function defined by . Notice that we have , so that whenever , and hence is well defined.
Now, we observe that satisfies the identity , for . Thus, is an invertible function on a finite set of odd size, and hence must have a fixed point, say . Identifying with its canonical representative in , we therefore get for some non-negative integer .
However, we then have , while (where we use the identity derived above, along with . However, these two equations imply that , which is a contradiction since is an integer. Thus, such an cannot exist.
Note: The main step in the proof above is that the function can be shown to have a fixed point. This step works even if 1987 is replaced with any other odd number larger than 1. However, for any even number , satisfies the condition .
--Mahamaya 21:15, 21 May 2012 (EDT)
1987 IMO (Problems) • Resources | ||
Preceded by Problem 3 |
1 • 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 | Followed by Problem 5 |
All IMO Problems and Solutions |