Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Continuous & Periodic

  1. #1
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks
    7

    Continuous & Periodic

    Let $\displaystyle f: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be continuous and $\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+1)=f(x+\sqrt{2}),$ for all $\displaystyle x \in \mathbb{R}.$ Prove that $\displaystyle f$ is constant.

    Source: Berkely Preliminary Exam
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  2. #2
    Senior Member pankaj's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2008
    From
    New Delhi(India)
    Posts
    318
    $\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+1)$

    Also,$\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+\sqrt{2})$

    If T is periodic with period $\displaystyle 1$ and also periodic with period $\displaystyle \sqrt{2}$ then $\displaystyle \sqrt{2}$ must be an integral multiple of $\displaystyle 1$ which is impossible.

    This means that $\displaystyle f(x)$ is periodic but its period is undefined.

    The situation is similar to
    $\displaystyle f(x)=c$
    where $\displaystyle c$ is constant.Here $\displaystyle f(x)$ is periodic but its period is not defined.

    Thus $\displaystyle f(x)$ may be a constant function.

    But my solution lacks rigour.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  3. #3
    Senior Member Sampras's Avatar
    Joined
    May 2009
    Posts
    301
    Quote Originally Posted by NonCommAlg View Post
    Let $\displaystyle f: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$ be continuous and $\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+1)=f(x+\sqrt{2}),$ for all $\displaystyle x \in \mathbb{R}.$ Prove that $\displaystyle f$ is constant. Is there a real analogue of Liouville's Theorem? Because $\displaystyle \mathbb{R} \subseteq \mathbb{C} $.

    Source: Berkely Preliminary Exam
    We can say that $\displaystyle f $ is bounded and uniformly continuous. Maybe we can say that $\displaystyle f $ is a doubly periodic function (e.g. $\displaystyle f(z) = f(z+u) = f(z+v) $). And somehow use Liouville's theorem to show that it is constant? The imaginary parts would be $\displaystyle 0 $.

    Or going from the first idea...if $\displaystyle f $ is bounded, then $\displaystyle |f(x)| \leq M $ for some $\displaystyle M>0 $ and for all $\displaystyle x \in \mathbb{R} $. So suppose for contradiction that $\displaystyle f $ was not constant. Then it is monotonic increasing or decreasing. But this contradicts the fact that $\displaystyle f $ is bounded. Hence $\displaystyle f $ is constant.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  4. #4
    Senior Member pankaj's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2008
    From
    New Delhi(India)
    Posts
    318
    I think I have it.

    $\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+1)$

    $\displaystyle x+1=x+nT$,where $\displaystyle T$ is the fundamental period or the smallest period and $\displaystyle n$ is any positive integer.

    $\displaystyle T=\frac{1}{n}$

    Similarly,$\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+\sqrt 2)$ results in

    $\displaystyle x+\sqrt 2=x+mT$,where $\displaystyle m$ is a positive integer and $\displaystyle T$ is the fundamental period.

    $\displaystyle T=\frac{\sqrt 2}{m}$

    $\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}=\frac{\sqrt 2}{m}$

    $\displaystyle m=\sqrt 2 n$

    which is impossible since m and n are integers.Therefore $\displaystyle T$ is undefined.But since the function repeats itself it can only be constant
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  5. #5
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by pankaj View Post
    I think I have it.

    $\displaystyle f(x)=f(x+1)$

    $\displaystyle x+1=x+nT$,where $\displaystyle T$ is the fundamental period or the smallest period and $\displaystyle n$ is any positive integer.

    $\displaystyle T=\frac{1}{n}$
    that's not always true. for example consider the function $\displaystyle f(x)=\begin{cases} 1 & x \in \mathbb{Q} \\ 0 & x \notin \mathbb{Q} \end{cases}.$ here we have $\displaystyle f(x+r)=f(x), \ \forall x \in \mathbb{R}, \ \forall r \in \mathbb{Q}.$ of course, $\displaystyle f$ is not continuous!

    my point is that i don't see how "continuity" of $\displaystyle f$ was used in your solution!
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  6. #6
    MHF Contributor Bruno J.'s Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    From
    Canada
    Posts
    1,266
    Thanks
    1
    Awards
    1
    Consider the set $\displaystyle S=\{a+b\sqrt{2}\: : \: a,b \in \mathbb{Z}\}$. This set is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$, and $\displaystyle f$ must be equal to $\displaystyle f(0)$ everywhere in $\displaystyle S$. Since $\displaystyle f$ is continuous and $\displaystyle S$ is dense, $\displaystyle f(x)=f(0)$ for all real $\displaystyle x$ and $\displaystyle f$ is constant.

    To see that $\displaystyle S$ is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$, notice that it is a subgroup of $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$, hence it suffices to prove that it is dense on some interval; we choose the interval $\displaystyle [0,1]$. Consider $\displaystyle J=\{s-\lfloor s\rfloor\: : \: s\in S\}$; this is a subset of $\displaystyle S \cap [0,1]$. Moreover if $\displaystyle s_1-\lfloor s_1\rfloor = s_2-\lfloor s_2\rfloor$ then $\displaystyle s_1=s_2$ because $\displaystyle \sqrt{2}$ is irrational. Hence there are infinitely many points of $\displaystyle S$ in $\displaystyle [0,1]$, hence two of them are arbitrarily close; but then since $\displaystyle S$ is closed under addition, $\displaystyle S$ is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$, Q.E.D.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  7. #7
    MHF Contributor

    Joined
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,295
    Thanks
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruno J. View Post

    Moreover if $\displaystyle s_1-\lfloor s_1\rfloor = s_2-\lfloor s_2\rfloor$ then $\displaystyle s_1=s_2$
    this is not true! counter-examples: $\displaystyle s_1=a_1+b\sqrt{2}, \ s_2=a_2+b\sqrt{2}, \ \ a_1 \neq a_2.$


    Hence there are infinitely many points of $\displaystyle S$ in $\displaystyle [0,1]$, hence two of them are arbitrarily close
    what do you mean by "them"? whatever it means, obviously $\displaystyle S \cap [0,1]=S_1$ having infinitely many points doesn't imply that $\displaystyle S_1$ is dense in $\displaystyle [0,1].$
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  8. #8
    Senior Member pankaj's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2008
    From
    New Delhi(India)
    Posts
    318
    'S' is dense in R

    What does this statement mean
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  9. #9
    Moo
    Moo is offline
    A Cute Angle Moo's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2008
    From
    P(I'm here)=1/3, P(I'm there)=t+1/3
    Posts
    5,618
    Thanks
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by pankaj View Post
    'S' is dense in R

    What does this statement mean
    Dense set - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  10. #10
    MHF Contributor Bruno J.'s Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    From
    Canada
    Posts
    1,266
    Thanks
    1
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by NonCommAlg View Post
    this is not true! counter-examples: $\displaystyle s_1=a_1+b\sqrt{2}, \ s_2=a_2+b\sqrt{2}, \ \ a_1 \neq a_2.$
    Oops. What I was thinking is that if $\displaystyle s_1=b_1\sqrt{2}, s_2=b_2\sqrt{2}$ and $\displaystyle s_1-s_2 \in \mathbb{Z}$ then $\displaystyle s_1=s_2$; since there are infinitely many choices of $\displaystyle b$, there are infinitely many points in $\displaystyle S_1$.

    what do you mean by "them"? whatever it means, obviously $\displaystyle S \cap [0,1]=S_1$ having infinitely many points doesn't imply that $\displaystyle S_1$ is dense in $\displaystyle [0,1].$
    The fact that $\displaystyle S_1$ contains infinitely many points does indeed imply that $\displaystyle S$ is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ : it implies that $\displaystyle S_1$ (and hence $\displaystyle S$) has an accumulation point, and any additive subgroup of $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ having an accumulation point is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  11. #11
    Super Member
    Joined
    Apr 2009
    From
    México
    Posts
    721
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruno J. View Post
    Oops. What I was thinking is that if $\displaystyle s_1=b_1\sqrt{2}, s_2=b_2\sqrt{2}$ and $\displaystyle s_1-s_2 \in \mathbb{Z}$ then $\displaystyle s_1=s_2$; since there are infinitely many choices of $\displaystyle b$, there are infinitely many points in $\displaystyle S_1$.



    The fact that $\displaystyle S_1$ contains infinitely many points does indeed imply that $\displaystyle S$ is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ : it implies that $\displaystyle S_1$ (and hence $\displaystyle S$) has an accumulation point, and any additive subgroup of $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ having an accumulation point is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$.
    Why is $\displaystyle S_1$ compact in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$?, or why is it closed? That's what you're using right?, that $\displaystyle S_1$ is sequentially compact
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  12. #12
    MHF Contributor Bruno J.'s Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    From
    Canada
    Posts
    1,266
    Thanks
    1
    Awards
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Jose27 View Post
    Why is $\displaystyle S_1$ compact in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$?, or why is it closed? That's what you're using right?, that $\displaystyle S_1$ is sequentially compact
    Where do you see that I said $\displaystyle S_1$ is compact or closed? It is neither. I said that $\displaystyle S_1$ is dense in $\displaystyle [0,1]$.

    To see this rigorously consider the map

    $\displaystyle S\rightarrow [0,1]$
    $\displaystyle s\mapsto s-\lfloor s \rfloor$

    This map, restricted to the subset of $\displaystyle S$ consisting of elements of the form $\displaystyle b\sqrt{2},\ b \in \mathbb{Z}$, is an injection; moreover when $\displaystyle s \in S$, we have $\displaystyle s-\lfloor s \rfloor \in S$; hence there are infinitely many points of $\displaystyle S$ in the bounded set $\displaystyle [0,1]$. Immediately from the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem we know that $\displaystyle S$ has an accumulation point. It is then an easy matter to show that any additive subgroup of $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ having an accumulation point is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$. To see this, suppose you have an open interval $\displaystyle I$ of length $\displaystyle L$ in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$. Then by the above there is an element of $\displaystyle S$ with 0<|s|<L; taking all its multiples (which are all elements of $\displaystyle S$) we see that one of them must fall in $\displaystyle I$.
    Last edited by Bruno J.; Jul 1st 2009 at 09:00 PM. Reason: small mistake
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  13. #13
    Super Member
    Joined
    Apr 2009
    From
    México
    Posts
    721
    Quote Originally Posted by Bruno J. View Post
    Where do you see that I said $\displaystyle S_1$ is compact or closed? It is neither. I said that $\displaystyle S_1$ is dense in $\displaystyle [0,1]$.

    To see this rigorously consider the map

    $\displaystyle S\rightarrow [0,1]$
    $\displaystyle s\mapsto \lfloor s \rfloor$

    This map, restricted to the subset of $\displaystyle S$ consisting of elements of the form $\displaystyle b\sqrt{2},\ b \in \mathbb{Z}$, is an injection; moreover when $\displaystyle s \in S$, we have $\displaystyle \lfloor s \rfloor \in S$; hence there are infinitely many points of $\displaystyle S$ in the bounded set $\displaystyle [0,1]$. Immediately from the Bolzano-Weierstrass theorem we know that $\displaystyle S$ has an accumulation point. It is then an easy matter to show that any additive subgroup of $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$ having an accumulation point is dense in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$. To see this, suppose you have an open interval $\displaystyle I$ of length $\displaystyle L$ in $\displaystyle \mathbb{R}$. Then by the above there is an element of $\displaystyle S$ with 0<|s|<L; taking all its multiples (which are all elements of $\displaystyle S$) we see that one of them must fall in $\displaystyle I$.
    I still don't get it, for example in $\displaystyle I=[0,1]$ there are only two integers $\displaystyle 0,1$ and no elements of the form $\displaystyle b\sqrt{2}$ with $\displaystyle b\neq 0$, the element $\displaystyle \sqrt{2} -1 \in [0,1]$ and is the only one that falls in $\displaystyle I$ from the set $\displaystyle A= \{ \sqrt{2} +a : a \in \mathbb{Z} \}$ and the set $\displaystyle B= \{ b\sqrt{2} -1 : b \in \mathbb{Z} \}$ and $\displaystyle S=A+B$, but how do you conclude that there are infinitely many elements from $\displaystyle S$ in $\displaystyle [0,1]$
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  14. #14
    MHF Contributor Bruno J.'s Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2009
    From
    Canada
    Posts
    1,266
    Thanks
    1
    Awards
    1
    You should read carefully what I wrote.

    $\displaystyle \sqrt{2} = 1.41421...$
    $\displaystyle 2\sqrt{2} = 2.82843...$
    $\displaystyle 3\sqrt{2} = 4.24264...$
    $\displaystyle 4\sqrt{2} = 5.65685...$

    and the sequence

    $\displaystyle \{0.41421...,\: 0.82843...,\: 0.24264...,\: 0.65685...,\: ...\}$

    is a sequence of distinct elements of $\displaystyle S$, all in $\displaystyle [0,1]$.
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

  15. #15
    Senior Member pankaj's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2008
    From
    New Delhi(India)
    Posts
    318
    I think it is time that solution be revealed
    Follow Math Help Forum on Facebook and Google+

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Math Help Forum Discussions

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sep 12th 2010, 09:43 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sep 12th 2010, 12:51 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: Mar 27th 2009, 04:23 AM
  4. Continuous Periodic Function Maximum/Minimum
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: Feb 19th 2009, 12:11 PM
  5. Are periodic functions uniformly continuous?
    Posted in the Calculus Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: Aug 6th 2008, 08:57 PM

Search Tags


/mathhelpforum @mathhelpforum