#discrete-math
1 messages · Page 167 of 1
you mean {b}?
yes elemnt b
since parts in partition must be pariwise disjoint?
but element b is in both partitions
so its confusing me
how the intersection isnt B
this already gives you just two possibilities
either the parts are disjoint or they are equal
and i think you noticed that they cannot be disjoint, so ...
different names for the same thing
what makes you think that this is a problem?
because partitions have to be uniuqe
ah
so
meaning
that theres nothing that interects
because
b
cannot be
in the partition of a?
nothing
think again
what do you mean with everything?
all the elements in the set?
the set itself, yes
but im so lost
1a. how b wouldnt be the answer
since b would be in both sets
could someone explain this
im sorry my brain is tiny
i mean that is true, but what makes you think that only b is in both sets
since we are told that b E P_a
im assuming everything else would like "alternate"
because parts of partition have to be unique
let's start again from the beginning
so $P_a$ and $P_b$ are not necessarily unique parts of the partition
Lochverstärker
since different parts in a partition are disjoint, there are two cases:
they're not necessarily distinct
they are unique in that they are the only parts which contain a, or b
</pedanticism>
Lochverstärker
do you agree with this @valid wave ?
ohhh
so either its the same set
so the intersection would be itself
or
they are compleletly different
so the empty set
gotcah
ye, and you figured out that $b \in P_a \cap P_b$
Lochverstärker
so that means they are the same?
but only b is in both sets>
not everything in partition b
no, Pa = Pb
it never said b was the only thing in Pb
because we are told that b is in the set of P_b
oh
what loses me ig is because partitions are usaully unique
so like in only 1 part of the parition
we are then told that b is in both parts of the parttion
yeah so they have to be the same part
the parts have to be unique, the names don't have to be
there's only one part which contains b but you can call it fifteen different things
in this case it turns out that Pa and Pb are two names for the same thing
how can we just make a be in both as well?
a is in Pa and Pa and Pb are the same thing so a is in Pa and Pb
how are they the same thing when Pa = ab and Pb = b
look
😦
Pa isn't just a and b
and Pb isn't just b
think of sets, generally, as boxes
so it's like
if you're told that there's an apple in the box
that doesn't mean there's not a banana in the box
if you're told there's only an apple in the box, then that would be true
so
we saw that both a and b are in Pa, right?
yes
but we also saw that this meant that Pa and Pb were the same thing
two names for the same box
capiche?
so if a and b are both in Pa, and Pa and Pb are the same thing, then a and b are both in Pb
ok so
the jump that they are the same
when you have two parts
then the intersection of them is either everything or nothing
so if they share anything, then you know they share everything
and if they share everything, they're the same thing
it's like saying 2 = 2
ahhh gotcah
so
the question saying that
B E P_a
is kind saying that
A E P_b
ahhh so the question saying B E P_a
we know that the intersection is gonna be everything
yes
uhhh
yes
they'd just be two completely different parts
nothing interesting to say
ok ok
i get it now
lassttt question
if we have a partition
isnt it supposed to be uniuqe
like how can we say b is in both
that idea seems weird
they're the same part
but ill worry about that later
two names for the same part
you're allowed to have multiple names for the same part
need help with this
this is a test review but idk how to do it
i need help to understand this ch for tomorrow test
honestly whichever we review doesn't matter
since it's just a review, but i need any help to understand
I mean, 4 is pretty obvious
I mean even "better" is sqrt(3) and sqrt(12) since we're not obviously squaring a square root
second one is quite easy too
u have n^2+n+1, that becomes n(n+1) + 1
and you know that n(n+1) or the multiplication of two consecutive integers will always be even, and then u add 1 to an even number making it odd
third one i believe u solve using contraposition (ie prove that if r is rational, that r^3 will also be rational)
n^2 mod n = 0
&
4 mod 2 = 0
rite??
yep
can someone explain number 8 pls
it's basically the same thing as 1
but if you turn it 90 degrees you get infinity!
it's the magic number where if you see it it means you're reading an applied math book
lol for the record my response is actually legitimate
problem 8 is like problem 1, just do induction using the result from problem 1
jk yeah just apply 1. and you'll get the answer
- is the ternary expansion in the tertiary cantor set supposed to be infinite?
- can i represent intervals [2,1]
[2,1], taken literally, will refer to the empty set
intervals are just a set showing a range though
i mean
why do you need to represent intervals with the left endpoint bigger than the right
if i represent outputs of a function as an interval then it would make it more clear
if the outputs are decreasing
im confused about how to go about solving this recurrence relation given that a0 = 1
i solved the characteristic equation and got that r=2n
Ann
as can be seen by simplifying 2 * 4 * 6 * ... * 2n
wait dont you solve recurrences by finding the roots of the characteristic equation
im confused
this only works for linear recurrences with constant coefficients
which are a very specific class of recurrence
oh you can only use the characteristic equation technique for linear homogeneous recurrence relation with constant coefficients
so for that one i have to use iteration?
idk if you "have to" use anything
i dont get how they got the part i put the brackets around
where did the ... x2 x 1 x a n-n come from
they applied the recurrence n times
right i get it now thx
how can you build a valid codeword of length n from valid codewords of length less than n?
thats the question you should think about
what is the best prime factorization algorithm?
There is no good prime factorisation algorithm
Let $a_{n-1}$ be a valid codeword of length n-1, so it has an even number of 0's in it. $a_{n}$ is obtained from $a_{n-1}$ by adding an extra decimal digit, in a way that preserves the given condition, so that extra digit can be anything except 0, otherwise, this would imply an odd number of 0's in $a_{n}$
Laïka
clashing notation
The best we have is checking if a prime p divides a number(n) and find the number of times it divides the number(let that be k,i.e.,k is the largest number such that p^k divides n) and writing n=p^k*(n/p^k) and repeating with n/p^k
afaik
who pung me
n indicates the length of the codeword
also i think i got it
you can either
- take an invalid codeword of length n-1 and attach a 0 to it
- take a valid codeword of length n-2 and attach 00 to it
- take a valid codeword of length n-2 and attach two non-zero digits to it
so... $a_n = (10^{n-1} - a_{n-1}) + 82a_{n-2}$ i guess?
Ann
the possible pairs of digits to attach to a codeword of length n-2 yeah
Привет @stray reef , не подскажешь случаем, тут ведь получается, что функция определена везде, ведь мы не достигаем случая, где у=4? По логике материала лекций проблем нет, но зачем тогда давать такое задание...
PS прим. рек функции вроде относятся к дискре
PPS прости за прямое обращение, я помню ещё в прошлом году что-то спрашивал по дискре и ты мне тогда помогла, надеюсь выглядело не крипово
стрелка вверх значит "не определено"?
мне как-то неочевидно, что здесь никогда не достигается случай y=4
Да, неопределённость
так, а как работает оператор \mu y?
Хм, просто же подставляя любые натуральные х, нам почти всегда должно хватить у=0 или у=1, чтобы функция была больше 1
Наименьшее число у, такое что
ага
$1 \dot - |g(y)-x| = 0$ вроде бы равносильно $|g(y)-x| \geq 1$
так
а забыла команду для этого минуса с точкой
\dot-
Ann
херово выглядит, но ладно
Да
Определить где она определена и какие значения принимает в точках где определена
ну и
То есть там везде получается что 0, кроме f(1)
Просто странно, я ожидал какую-то возню, вот и подумал, что может я что-то не так интерпретирую
okay i could use some assistance as for how i get the other value in this... its not making much sense
just distribute
$38 - 9 \cdot (42 - 1 \cdot 38) = 38 - 9 \cdot 42 + 9 \cdot 38 \ = -9 \cdot 42 + 10 \cdot 38$
Ann
um... im still confused
don't overthink it
... but im not seeing how distributing is supposed to give that 10...
you couldve said that outright instead of leaving me guessing, just sayin'
38 + 9*38 = 10*38.
now... to be fair... my initial post did ask for help on how to get the other value. but then this is just... uh... i think i see that now..?
I need help getting over this hill
this is what they mean by one line notation
--
In the question there are three parts (a) (b) and (c)
I've done a and b a while ago but then got stuck with c and then dropped the book I was reading for a little bit
The first two screenshots are of the question
The third is from earlier in the text to clarify if needed
I will also explain the idea for the solutions I had in mind for a and b
In spoilers in case someone wants to give it a go
For a || every permutation can be matched up with a corresponding one that comes from reversing the elements.. A c b d to d b c a for example and then considering the increasing segments||
For b || when we have n-1 elements permuted there are n spaces where the next and largest element can be inserted. If the largest is placed at the end of a segment it will not generate a new segment. Thus we are worried about f(n-1,k) case in this situation and there K such spots so the k*f(n-1,k) term. Similarly for the other case there are n-(k-1) for the other case since we need to consider perms with k-1 segments and not K since we would be increasing them in this process. And hence the (n+1-k)*f(n-1,k-1) term. These are all the possibilities when adding the nth element into a n-1 perm. Either you increase the number of segments or you don't. And then you measure with the help of that wrt what f(n, k) you want. ||
B looks long only because there are two terms which I had to explain
(pls ping BTW thanks a ton for looking)
Yo programming 2 , calc 3 and discrete math . I am taking those next semester
is this going to be hell? or is it doable
discrete maths will be pretty tough lmao
fuck
Is anyone able to help with this ?
Can anyone explain to me why
bool someFunc(int a, int b) {
for(something) {
if(something) {
}
}
}
Would be T(n) = n - 1?
lol what is this a function takes two ints loops "something" then if ("something") do nothing?
I mean, it is no specific function lol
If there was code in there it would only be one for loop and one if statement inside it
wait so whts the connection from the fucntion and T(n) = n -1
I am just trying to figure out a recurrence relation formula for the function
And justify it
Let's just say I had that T(n)=n - 1
Forget the code lol
If I were to justify it, would it just be, input a size for the function?
So T(1) = 0 because and array of size one doesn't do anything?
Write the equation it'll be smth like a/b + p/q = k
Take LCM and move one of the terms to the right and see what observation you can make while keeping in mind b does not divide a and q does not divide p
is there any mechanical/easy way to find all subsets of a given set?
for finite one - enumerate it and use char function
subsets of finite (or more generally countable) sets corresponds to binary strings
^^ If you are doing it in a program you could maybe say the nth subset is the one you get from taking the binary form of n and then using the corresponding elements
so in a way you already have all the subsets enumerated and available.
We are doing this in my discrete math class, but if it doesnt fit here please tell me! to confirm this answer, −18 mod 5 = 2?
yes
Thank you!
So I dont understand my prof’s notes and its disordered so I don’t know where step 1 is to approach this problem. Multiply 1111(subscript 2) by 4 = ________(subscript 2)
Yes sorry ill edit that so it makes more sense. I didnt even realize i had written subset
Sorry for the late message. but 0100?
100, yes
so multiplying by 4 looks like shifting to the left by two positions in binary
mhm ok so i would then do that to 1111?
....yes
so then it would just be 11110000?
why are you multiplying by 16 and not by 4 
Excuse that sorry. 111100
sorry sorry habit on other servers lol
what's troubling you?
Do you know what a geometric sequence is?
it's a sequence of numbers that differ by a common ratio
You are given that the first term in the geometric sequence is 2
and then also given that the ratio is 2
The ratio is used on the first term to find the second term
and it's done by multiplying
We multiply the first term(2) by the ratio(2) to get the second term
Which is 4
then the second term multiplied by the ratio to get the third term
and so on
yes
similarly, for an arithmetic sequence
instead of multiplying by the ratio, we add the common difference to the previous term to find the next term
Difference means difference between the next and previous term
The formula for difference in an arithmetic sequence is d = Next - Previous
Similarly for ratio, it's r = next/previous
we would subtract if the difference was negative
yes
yes
yeah just put that down
hm
Okay so the rule is that if (a,b) is in S, then we must have (a+1,b+2) and (a+1,b+1) in S
Since (0,0) is in S, we must have (0+1,0+2) and (0+1,0+1) in S, that is (1,2) and (1,1) in S
now since you have (1,2) in S, use the rule again
since you have (1,1) in S, use the rule again
The rule says, if you have (a,b)
Then you must have (a+1,b+2) and (a+1,b+1) in S
SInce we had (0,0), we used the rule and concluded that we have (1,1) and (1,2)
Now since we have (1,1)
We must use the rule again
And since we have (1,2), we must use the rule again
lmao
?
@tepid fulcrum why'd u delete all the messages
oh lol
lmao
see it lagging the server
it was a test for sure
hi just making sure im understanding
'
when making groups from this set of numbers
we divide by the amount of groups we have
when we make our permutations
to account for switching the groups into different orders right?
looks good @valid wave
thanks
also
wouldnt that second line with two astriks mean that x has two outputs?
but it says it has exactly 1
and why does only the first set have to map to something for it to be a function
oh wait, i think the first set is the domain?
but still im lost
even the idea of saying f(x) = f(y)
doesnt that mean a function is mapping to the same image?
hey for questions like these do i just substitute the given a_n into the recurrence relation, if it is a solution i should get back the a_n i sub in correct? if so I also wanna know what the solution really means?
this is the solution but i dont undertstnad it
how would you use inductive definition with binary functions and predicates
im tryin to do the first question rn
if i understand 1 I wanna try 2 on my own
<@&286206848099549185>
also a set of real numbers is never countable rgt, even if u have a finite number of 1's or 0's in its decimal
Uh what?
I'm not sure what you mean by "having limited 1's and 0's"
OHH
sorry that was a different quesiton
this one is consiting of all 1's in decimal reppresentation
4c)
so why do you think its uncountable?
well just with real numbers in general thers always goanne be a number in between "a" and "b" rgt
so my assumption is any real number set is uncountable?
like R all real numbers
I mean
R is uncountable yes
But it's not because "thers always goanne be a number in between "a" and "b""
ohoh sorry this was the question yea i ss'd the wrong one thats why i was lowkey foncfusedd too
this 3c) not containing 0 in decimal representation
is this uncountable?
what do u think
i think uncountabel? lool
and why?
For example, the rational numbers also has this property that between any two real numbers, there's a rational, but the rationals are countable
I mean, the answer is fine, the reasoning is not
mhm tryna spill the beans on the reasoning 😉
You should go figure out why R is uncountable
well thats just cause u cant list the numbers between like 0 and 1 rgt
and so for all realnumbers its not possuible to have a 1-1 correspondence with natruak numbers
mhm now u making me think everything is countable lmao
The thing to look up is Cantor's diagonal argument
but I feel like you should've learned this in your class
oh this is the chart rgt
danm yea i did but a while ago
ohhhh ok i see basically if u construct a real number from the diagaol of previous real numbers u will have a new number
meaning u can always create a different number hence u cannot list EVERY number
ya?
Yeah that's the idea
so you want to try to find a way to adapt that proof to the problems you have
OHHH
so basically uncountable cause u can construct a new real number from diagonals even if 0’s aren’t present
so even if u tak out all 1,3,9 for instance still uncountable
yea
noice ty
how do i approach this question
hi
quick question
for proving a function is one to one
why would we prove that f(x1) is the same as f(x2)
wouldnt that mean we get the same output?
You're not proving that f(x1) is the same as f(x2)
you're assuming that f(x1) is the same as f(x2) and proving this must mean that x1 = x2
oh
meaing that they are the same number
so every unique number
gives us a different image?
🤯
ohhh shitttt
ok that makes sesne
the explanation was confusing me
thank sm
so pretty much proving this means that we are showing that two random nums in the set give the same value
which means they are the same number
so any different number will also have a unique iamge
time to practice thanks
thanks again
I’m trying to figure out yet another exercise. Here is my reasoning and I wonder if that’s the correct way to approach the problem.
PR as primitive recursive
Hey guys this question I can’t get, I’ve gotten 14, 16, 17, 52 and they have all been wrong, would anyone be able to help me?
Hey if I define my hash function as
h(x) = ( ( x / 10^0) % 10 ) + ( ( x / 10^1) % 10 ) + ( ( x / 10^2) % 10 ) + ............ ( until x became 0 )
Can I inverse this hash function I don't know how can I make subject x from this modulo operation
If I am asking in wrong channel please let me know.
this is not bijective, so how would you "reverse" this?
oh sorry we can't do this we have to try all possibilities in any way to crack hash password
need help
well assume the negation(n/(n+2)>=n/(n+1)) and prove that it leads to nonsense
it may help to remember that n being in Z+ implies that n, n+1 and n+2 are all >0
for instance, if you were able to assume the negation and prove 1>=2, that would be a contradiction
"Find the number of permutations (as a function of the derangement numbers) of 1,2,...,n in which exactly k of the n numbers are in their correct position"
Little confused on how to approach this question. I know derangement numbers are valid if none of the original numbers are in their original position. So would I find how many positions that is, then take the factorial of that?
Also there would be a formula as the solution opposed to an actual value right? Because n and k are not defined, so it has to be generalized, right?
I'm also not exactly sure what 'their correct position' is referring to
Essentially, you are to calculate the number of derangements for each sub-list that contains n-k numbers.
@broken kiln
You can express the number of derangements of a list of x numbers as D(x).
@lyric pumice So would it be something like D(x) = (n/x) + D(n-x)? So we are finding the number of permutations with (n/x) using the formula n! / (r! (n - r)!) and then the D(n-x) to iterate through the different sets?
@broken kiln No.
Derangements of a list of n-k numbers are counted by D(n-k).
Then there are different ways to choose a sub-list of n-k numbers from a list of n numbers.
How many ways are there?
I definitely think I'm missing some fundamentals here, because I am so confused. Should I completely forget about using the permutation formula?
d(n-1) / n! ways?
@lyric pumice We should be decreasing each time right?
There are n choose k ways. @broken kiln
how would go with this one?
you could go through the same algebra as you would to solve this equation, but with more rigor/formality
I've been learning combination type questions and have been having quite the conundrum. I've encountered quite a few questions similar to something like "x1+x2+x3+x4=30, find how many integer solutions there are" and keep finding conflicting information from my textbook and teacher. The textbook and homework gives the answer of the combination of (30+4-1,30)=(33,30), but my teacher and other websites say it should be something like (33,4). Which one is truly right?
ok so then
Commander Vimes
basically this formula
so it would be (33,30) combination correct
yes (33, 30) is correct
Ok so to expand on that, I was given a practice question like this, and it made me think I had been doing this all wrong
I was doing some practice quesitons and came across this, and it was just like another question I had done, but I had gotten this one wrong and was confused.
what ? means
welll
Because thats what the other similar questions ive done were
look
Ik how to do it
or so i thought
but the answer is (33,5)
when I thought it would be (33,29)
usually there are >= tho
well then look
Commander Vimes
I understand that I think
My steps were x1+x2+x3+x4+x5=50
50-21 (the given inequalites) = 29
29+5-1=33
Result:
21
i just dont understand
why they use 5, instead of 29
for the 2nd element of the combination
the answer they give nonsimplified is 33!/(5!28!), which is (33,5) right
yes
so where am I wrong
see, theres also a similar problem
You could solve it the same way, x1+x2+x3+x4+x5=14
but again, the answer is similar in that its (18,5), not what I would think (18,14)
But in the homework, we have questions and answers like this https://www.slader.com/textbook/9780534203771-bundle-discrete-mathematics-with-applications-3rd-student-solutions-manual-3rd-edition/355/exercise-set/13/
Where what I would think to be true is true
So Im just scared on the test, which method should I use?
well the one i posted is proved to be correct..
I also found this on a website which is so odd to me, because it contradicts that I think https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/course/15-251/Recitations/recitation03/rec03_sol.pdf
which confused me even more
wait, nvm they are equivlent arent they?
(44,4)=(44,40), because of binomial theory right
you know, what, I think my teacher simply forgot the -1 on the second element, so instead of (33, 4) they did (33,5)
they forgot how to do it with every similar problem
the dodgeball question should end with (18,4), but they wrote (18,5)
could happen
Anyone know how to do 5.60a
,rotate
Think of finding the number of ways not to answer the first two questions
then subtract this from the total number of answering 10 question out of 13
@slow jewel
no idea mate
dont know how to find the number of ways not to choose the first two questions
Actually there is a much more simpler way to solve this
i just guessed c(11,8)
Yes that's correct. Just pick the 8 questions to answer from the remaining 13-2=11
what about part b?
For the first question to answer, you have 2 possible choices: either question 1 or question 2. For the remaining 9 question to answer, you have 11C9 = 55 options
By the multiplication rule
,calc 2*55
Result:
110
i should have became a physicist
Discrete maths is a pain for me too
its just counting problems
no its just me facing such questions routinely
and i think i have your book
its called "combinatorics and graph theory"
no?
same ^^ but I hard time with graph theory tbh
can someone help me with that ?
How did they reach the $140/5n conclusion?
They say "at least $140" when the amount is a multiple of 5 but isn't $50 a multiple of 5?
yes but $50 is less than $140
their conclusion only pertains to numbers >= 140
and divisible by 5
But where did that 140 come from? Like in my eyes I'm not understanding because it sounds arbitrary
I'm sure it isn't I just don't quite understand
it's just the first number for which the pattern starts
I can't think of the equation atm :/
more importantly, they didn't use an equation;
they systematically wrote down reachable numbers from least to greatest and then *conjectured* just by looking at them that there is this pattern that starts at 140, in which the next number will be 5 greater
Here they pick n = 28 to n = 32 for their basis step
But then here they use k >=32
I'm sorta confused again, why didn't they just use 1-2 like n = 28 and n= 29 for basis, why all the way to 5?
nvm, I think thats literally part of strong induction
Ah I finally see now
Jesus, I know more practice will get me better intuition but I just don't have the thought process to get through induction steps sometimes
If I'm understanding this right, the first step is to break off a column so its one less column and the same rows represented by (m-1) * q, and then a 1 * q rectangle being a single column of the new break?
This is the part specifically I'm confused about then
Where does the +1 come from in the (m-1)q -1 + (q-1) +1 come from? k+1?
yes
ah okay thanks!
Similarly then I get where this +1 comes from (although it confuses me since we already modified k+1 to k-2), but where does this +3 pop up from?
Wait
I get the +1, its from the 2^1
it's putting eveyrthing under a common denominator
like $\frac{k-2}{3} + 1 = \frac{k-2+3}{3}$
young_smasher
yeah basically
Ah ok thanks that makes sense
How many flags can we make with 7 stripes, if we have 2 white, 2 red, and 3 green
stripes? Justify.
Induction is killing me I've done 5/16 of my problem set in a whopping 6 hours of working averaging over an hour per question
I feel like this is asking me to basically make a case where I subtract 1 from the stripe count each time I add a stripe to the flag.
Am I wrong?
What is the intuition here for doing an-2 instead of an-1?
Like I get the problem and how it works later
because they are equal
Hello, I'm new to coding theory and would appreciate some help. Let C and C' be two codes with check matrices H and H' respectively where H' is obtained from H by rearranging the columns of H in a certain why. Explain the relation between codewords in C and C'
In the previous question I was asked to find an example of H where C and C' are not the same
What methods am I going to use to prove this?
the hint is pretty useful
Sure because if is even then n/2 is a number so that’s ez
maybe im thinking too much but do you do some kind of contrapositive proof for this? I feel like I'm missing something
n doesn't divide evenly and the two numbers added are a difference of 1
id rather say: there exists an integer k such that n=2k+1
oh yeah thats the proper way of saying it
so the floor of n/2 is equivalent to k?
okay i managed to figure it out
is it a fact that if u mod a number (n) by (m) that the possible outcome values will always be 0-(m-1)
yes
I don't think it's always implemented this way in programming languages for the record
ty
and yea very differenyt just in like discrete math ty tho
i feel like i lack something before i conclude
@fast umbra your proof doesn't really make sense
what makes a set countable is onto functions? or both one-to-one AND onto?
hommies is there a linear time algo for mst
For B) I'm pretty rusty on combinations, I know since order matters its a lot
I was thinking like 6 + 5! but that sounds like too many, is it like division 6!/2! or smth? That doesn't sound right either argh
Wait is it even! Or is it counting? like for a) I wrote 6 + 5!, but is it just 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1?
is that rosen?
how do you get from
1 (congruent=) 8(-4) mod 11
to
1 (congruent=) 8(7) mod 11 ?
im trying to find the multiplicitive inverse of 8 mod 11, so i used the extended euclidean algorithm on gcd(8,11)
i got -4, but it says the answer should be 7
im assuming theyre eq
oh
they just added 11 to it, didnt they
crazy how that works, sometimes the question only needs to leave your lips for you to understand what you did wrong
thanks
are u thanking urself
uhhhhhh
yessss
also, i do have a question actually
when im doing this extended euclidean algorithm, trying to find the multiplicitive inverse, when i do it on 8 mod 11, it ends up being gcd(8, 11), and my first equation is 11 = 8*1 + 3.
at the end I get an equation
1 = 3 * 11 - 4 * 8
so the inverse i find is -4. does the 3 have a special meaning in this case? for example, is 3 the inverse of 11 or something?
11=0 so 3 cant be the inverse, as 11 doesnt have an inverse mod 11
ahh shoot, i think i see
3 is just the number that happens to solve 11x + 8y = 1
Hey am interrupting?
so for the euclidean algorithm gcd(8,11), we always take the bigger number on the left, like 11 = 8*1 + 3?
and thanks
i mean yeah, if you want to do it the other way it doesnt really matter
its just a lot more helpful to do it that way
tyty
please dont ping me @faint narwhal i am trying to sleep @faint narwhal .thanks
i will let the moderation know if you keep doing this @faint narwhal . i do not tolerate this behaviour.
@errant bear i offer my deepest apologies
@errant bear I was only trying to express my appreciation

@quaint star can you please direct the moderation of this establishment to me. @faint narwhal is jesting and i am trying to sleep
I am moderation. If @faint narwhal didn't ping you @errant bear , how could @faint narwhal be sure that you @errant bear got their apology? Stop being a baby and put your phone on silence.
wow. i am offended at the lack of of respect and empathy in this serving by the moderation. if not even the moderation is willing to help me out with handling the joker @faint narwhal i do not know what is going to happen
Your offense has been noted, and the note will be thrown away.
wow. i now understand what kind of serving this is... i am a pauled.
@errant bear good night
good morning @errant bear good to hear
i am always happy to share @faint narwhal
oh sorry @faint narwhal
i meant to ping @last timber
okay i will keep that in mind szarekh, the silent king @last timber
@edgy totem you can write $x_2 = 5 + y_2$ and $x_3 = 10 + y_3$ and count the solutions of the equation $x_1 + y_2 + y_3 + x_4 + x_5 + x_6 = 25$ with $x_1, y_2, y_3 \leq 9$ and all variables nonnegative
Ann
how do you count the number of solutions to x_1+x_2...+x_6 where the restriction x<9 is only on 3 of the variables
inclusion-exclusion principle
ahh okay
thank you
is it also equivalent to solving
nvm
wait
if x1,x2,x3 was less than 9
then 9 + 9+9+x4+x5+x6 > 25
and x4+x5+x6>-3.....
nevermind, I got it!
it was dumb by me
I need to double check more often
thank you!
Thought so 😦 how would you prove it?
Let x in f(CnD). Exists y in CnD s.t f(y)=x. By the definition of intersection y is in C and y is in D. So f(y)=x in f(C) and f(y)=x in f(D) so x in f(D) n f(C) so LHS subset of RHS
LHS, RHS?
left handside
Ah, thank you!
I rewrote it a bit
uh... i could use some guidance on how to determine if K3 is a subgraph of this... (bleh i wish subscript or whatever was possible on discord)
K_3 is the complete graph on 3 vertices right?
i believe so
that doesn't help me really comprehend how which is what im needing guidance on since just started this material.. today
the k graphs confuse me
Well, to show that K3 is a subgraph, you need to show that its vertex set is a subset of the vertex set of the "bigger" graph (the same applies for the edge set)
K3 given by ({1,3,5}, {13,15,35}) is a subgraph
i see...k4 might be one then..? but it described that as done either as a square or as a triangle with the dot in the middle.. unsure about how it is in the example graph
it's a simplification for writing the edge set
... anyway moving on... now uh im not sure if this is possible but im being asked to either come up with a 3 regular graph with 5 vertices if it is.. same with a 3 regular graph with 6.. hm.
...?
Have you heard of the "handshake lemma"?
It basically says that the sum of the degrees over all vertices in a given graph is equal to twice the number of edges
uh... there was a mention of some induction proof or theorem that stated degrees = 2 * number of edges but never heard of this "handshake lemma"
You can use this lemma
3*5 = 15 which is not even
So a 3 regular graph on 5 vertices doesn't exist
so... a 3 regular one with 6 vertices could potentially exist but im not sure how i'd draw that if it did
each vertex should have 3 neighbors
a 3-regular graph with 6 vertices is bipartite
put 3 vertices on one side and then 3 vertices on the other
then put an edge between each pair
That’s the simplest way to draw such a graph.
If it’s unlabelled, then two structures exist (up to isomorphism)
this is gonna be a weird chapter, i can tell already lol
okay... now this is one i definitely don't know how to do and im not seeing anything that spells it out in the section.. largest n such that kn = cn
k is complete graph, c is cycle of vertices, according to book
a would be k and b would be c
then n is pretty easy to find
okay... then how would i go about determining/finding that
well look
this already suggests that n < 5
so you have only 4 possible nominees
n = 3
you could do this by brute force tbh
its the same graph (pictorially)
i believe you misunderstood. those aren't related to the problem, it was just as an example of k and c. i have no graphs to go with for the one in question
for different problems there may be different methods
if they are the same, they have the same edge set and vertex set (up to isomorphism)
let me put it another way then. this is all i have to go off of
... does it matter which vertices from graph g i set c and e equal to? can't figure out which should correspond to 1 and which should correspond to 4
For this Q I gotta use power set cardinality right?
Its subsets total - subsets < 1 to find subsets > 1, no?
there would only be one subset with less than one element
it should be total subsets - subsets with cardinality < 2
hi, i was wondering if this would be an example of an bipartite graph?
what do you think?
You need to partition the verticies
i did, but it comes back to the same part of the veritcies
so when i did V1 as {A, B, C} and V2 as {D, E, F}
an example would be A and C would match to each other, which im confused it its allowed
do you know what being bipartite means?
you should go figure out exactly what bipartite means
it says that every edge should connect to a vertex according to my notes and textbook
yea im really confused on how it works anyways beside for the partion part of the graph
you should go figure out what bipartite actually means
@faint narwhal wow thanks for the help! i now know that i should go figure out what bipartite means. thanks 🙂
you're an excellent helper 🙂 @faint narwhal
... i can't tell if zopherus is ever being serious

||this is unironically the best way anyone could have helped with this question||
need help with this practice question
well all of them
he does not give a problem this hard in class but the practice problem is this hard
so i'm lost
well ik that all of that $n!=1\cdot2\cdot3\cdots n$
Centrous
the union of the natural numbers and positive rational is countable r ight?
every countable union of countable sets is countable
okok thank you
Is there something similar to generating functions, but not generating functions? Like is there another way to encode information besides exponents?
I’ll probably spend some sitting time thinking about this tomorrow
That would still be a generating function
Also see Dirichlet generating functions
In mathematics, a Dirichlet series is any series of the form
∑
n
=
1
∞
a
n
n
...
You encode a series ($a_n$) as
\newline
$F(s)=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty} \frac{a_i}{i^s}$
Drunknarwhal
Exponential generating functions too maybe?
Oh cool thanks
Prove that there exists no graph with 2, 3, 4 or 5 vertices such that its only automorphism is the identity.
i'm not quite sure how to go about... induction seems rather daunting
and so does manually checking 
- Prove that you only need to consider connected graphs
- Draw all the connected graphs on 2,3,4,5 verticies and observe their nontrivial automorphisms
360 + (360 x 15%)
if I have say the numbers 1 , 2 ,3 ,4 ... till 25
and I ask you to find all the primes between them
so the theorem says you first cross 2 cause 2 is prime right?
and then you cross every multiple of 2 ( crossing meaning you eliminate them, cz they are not prime )
but the theorem says every number from 2 till 2^2 that weren't crossed are primes
and I am asking why
I didn't understand why
if the only prime you know is 2, then everything that doesn't divide by 2 up to ^2 is a new prime
so just 3 really
if the only primes you know are 2 and 3, then everything that doesn't divide by 2 or 3 up to 3^2 is a new prime
I am gonna add to this that everything that doesn't divide 2 between 2 and 2^2
ok so it's because it's like
why up to 3^2
if you have a number n
and it divides by a prime p
where n > p > sqrt(n)
then you know it divides by at least one more prime q < sqrt(n)
yes this I understand it
yeah so that's it isn't it
p<sqrt(n)
so up to 49, if it doesn't divide by 2, 3 or 5 then it's prime
up to 121, if it doesn't divide by 2, 3, 5 or 7 then it's prime
no
what?
if n isn't prime, then the smallest prime factor of n is at most sqrt(n)
there might be another one
so take 10
5 is a prime factor of 10
but sqrt(10) < 5
so 10 < 5^2
ah
so 5 can't be the smallest prime factor of 10, because the smallest number with only 5 as its factors is 25, apart from 5
then where does the theorem that says a prime factor of a number must always be less than sqrt of n?
ah the smallest prime factor
of a non-prime
ah
ok so it's like
right, starting over, i'm messing up this explanation
so say n is not prime and it has a prime factor p > sqrt(n)
this I dont understand
say n is not prime and it has a factor p > sqrt(n), eg. n is 10 and p is 5 > sqrt(10)
alright so p is the smallest prime factor here or considered like that
alright I will shutup sorry
ok so i was typing out a really long thing but i thought of a shorter explanation
if n = kp and p > sqrt(n), then k < sqrt(n)
k must either be a prime or have even smaller prime factors
either way there is a prime factor < sqrt(n)
and essentially if you know all the primes < sqrt(n), then you don't need to consider any primes p between sqrt(n) and n, because if you have any p > sqrt(n), then you know that there's a smaller prime goes into n
no, that's it
lets clarify more
ok
no
so it depends right?
any non-prime, or composite, number has a prime factor =< sqrt(n)
but for example 8 has no prime factors > sqrt(8)
yeah alright true
ok now going back to the theorem
if you have say 3 which is prime and you crossed all multiples of 2 and 3
now I still don't see why the numbers that weren't crossed between 3 and 3*3 are prime
(I understood everything you said earlier)
if you know all the primes =< sqrt(n)
then if n is composite and has a prime factor > sqrt(n)
it also has to have a prime factor =< sqrt(n)
so if it doesn't have any prime factors =< sqrt(n)
it has no prime factors > sqrt(n) either
except itself
just to clarify n is the composite number or the non prime number
or the potential prime number
potential
you said not all numbers have prime factor > sqrt(n)
yes
but if it does
then it also has something =< sqrt(n)
so if you've checked everything =< sqrt(n)
there's no point checking > sqrt(n)
but here you are talking in reverse
yes
ok so just logic: so suppose whenever you have A, you have B
then if you don't have B
you definitely don't have A
right?
I understood what you said you said if we don't have a prime factor for a number between 1 and sqrt(number) then the number is prime
but my question is in reverse
no wait
go back to the logic
if you always have B whenever you have A: then if you see you don't have B, you know you don't have A, right?
uh sorry what do you mean by a and b
logic
A implies B?
A is finding a prime less than sqrt n?
what is A then?
whenever you have A, you have B
then if you don't have B
you definitely don't have A
whenever n is not prime and you have a prime factor > sqrt(n), you have a prime factor =< sqrt(n)
so if you think n is not prime but you don't have a prime factor =< sqrt(n), you don't have a prime factor > sqrt(n)
so n has to be prime
ah
@coral raven but I swear how does that relate to n being between his primefactor and hisprimefactor^2
so if you know all the prime factors =< sqrt(n), then all the composite numbers up to n have one of those prime factors
so if you know all the prime factors =< m, then all the composite numbers up to m^2 have one of those prime factors



