Cut Table

Logic Level 3

A rectangular table has been cut into subrectangles whose edges are parallel to the original table, as in the example above. Given that each subrectangle has at least one side of integer length (in centimeters), is it true that the original table has at least one side of integer length (in centimeters)?

Yes Possibly but not necessarily No

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

3 solutions

Maggie Miller
Aug 13, 2015

Impose coordinates parallel to the sides of the rectangle (units centimeters). Label the subrectangles R 1 , , R n R_1,\ldots,R_n , and the original/large table R R .

Given a rectangle [ a , b ] × [ c , d ] [a,b]\times[c,d] , the integral

a b c d e 2 π i ( x + y ) d y d x \displaystyle\int_a^b\int_c^d e^{2\pi i(x+y)}dydx

= 1 4 π 2 ( e 2 π b e 2 π i a ) ( e 2 π i d e 2 π i c ) \displaystyle=-\frac{1}{4\pi^2}(e^{2\pi b}-e^{2\pi i a})(e^{2\pi i d}-e^{2\pi i c})

is zero if and only if at least one of d c , b a d-c,b-a is an integer - that is, if the rectangle has at least one integral side. In particular, note

R j e 2 π i ( x + y ) d A = 0 \displaystyle\int\int_{R_j}e^{2\pi i(x+y)}dA=0 for each j j .

Therefore,

R e 2 π i ( x + y ) d A = j = 1 n R j e 2 π i ( x + y ) d A \displaystyle\int\int_R e^{2\pi i(x+y)}dA=\sum_{j=1}^n\int\int_{R_j}e^{2\pi i(x+y)}dA

= j 1 n 0 = 0 , \displaystyle=\sum_{j_1}^n0=0, so the original rectangle (table) must have at least one integral side.

Consider a=c= .5 b=d= 1 The integral is 0 but the differences are not integers.

Alexander Valencia - 5 years, 10 months ago

Log in to reply

Fixed, thanks.

Maggie Miller - 5 years, 10 months ago

Another nice proof would be to show that a rectangle with non-integer sides can never be divided into subrectangles of atleast 1 integer sides and result would follow, However I used an inductive proof which turned to be much longer than I hoped it would be.

Ajinkya Shivashankar - 4 years, 7 months ago
Richard Levine
Aug 29, 2015

No matter how you divide up the table into subrectangles, you can always extend the sides of one or two rectangles to form 4 large subrectangles. This simplifies the problem quite a bit.

In the example image, I've extended one side of a rectangle to form subrectangles A,B,C,D. If subrectangle AC is integer vertically, than the table must be integer vertically. If subrectangle AC is non-integer vertically, then it must be integer horizontally, forcing subrectangle BD to be integer horizontally. Since an integer plus an integer is an integer, that would force the table to be integer horizontally. Therefore, the table must be integer on at least one side.

simple logic. there is one parallel vertical line in the image which is not vecrtical side of original rectangle. Constider two sub-rectangles consisting of those if vecrtical line is not integer both horizontal lines would be integer summing up to horizontal side an integer

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...