Make many "Morrie's Laws"

Geometry Level 5

Richard Feynman was fascinated by the equation cos ( 2 0 ) cos ( 4 0 ) cos ( 8 0 ) = 1 2 3 \cos(20^\circ)\cos(40^\circ)\cos(80^\circ)=\dfrac1{2^3} , which he named "Morrie's Law" after a childhood friend, Morrie Jacobs, who told him the rule. More generally, how many positive integers n < 90 n<90 are there such that k = 0 m 1 cos ( 2 k n ) = 1 2 m \displaystyle \prod_{k=0}^{m-1}\cos(2^kn^\circ)=\dfrac{1}{2^m} for some positive integer m m ?

Inspiration: here and here .


The answer is 14.

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.

1 solution

Kartik Sharma
Sep 8, 2015

Great problem! No wonder why it could fascinate even Mr. Feynman!

k = 0 m 1 c o s ( 2 k n ) = 1 2 m \displaystyle \prod_{k=0}^{m-1}{cos(2^kn^{\circ})} = \frac{1}{2^m}

LHS becomes

1 2 m s i n ( n ) 2 s i n ( n ) c o s ( n ) k = 1 m 1 2 c o s ( 2 k n ) \displaystyle \frac{1}{2^m sin(n^{\circ})} 2sin(n^{\circ})cos(n^{\circ}) \prod_{k=1}^{m-1}{2 \ cos(2^kn^{\circ})}

Repeatedly using 2 s i n ( x ) c o s ( x ) = s i n ( 2 x ) 2 sin(x) cos(x) = sin(2x) ,

= s i n ( 2 m n ) 2 m s i n ( n ) \displaystyle = \frac{sin(2^m n^{\circ})}{2^m sin(n^{\circ})}

implies that

s i n ( 2 m n ) 2 m s i n ( n ) = 1 2 m s i n ( 2 m n ) = s i n ( n ) \displaystyle \frac{sin(2^m n^{\circ})}{2^m sin(n^{\circ})} = \frac{1}{2^m} \Rightarrow sin(2^m n^{\circ}) = sin(n^{\circ})

2 m n = 180 k + ( 1 ) k n \displaystyle \Rightarrow 2^m n = 180k + (-1)^k n for some positive integer k k .

Now, it becomes a number theory problem. We'll take up the 2 possible cases

Case 1 - k k is even

2 m n = 360 k + n 2 m n n ( m o d 360 ) \displaystyle 2^m n = 360 k + n \Rightarrow 2^m n \equiv n\pmod{360}

If gcd ( n , 360 ) = 1 \text{gcd}(n,360) = 1 then our equation becomes 2 m 1 ( m o d 360 ) 2^m \equiv 1 \pmod{360} which has no solutions since gcd ( m , 360 ) 1 \text{gcd}(m,360) \neq 1 .

Hence, gcd ( n , 360 ) 1 \text{gcd}(n,360) \neq 1 , it is such that gcd ( m , 360 gcd ( n , 360 ) ) = 1 \text{gcd}\left(m,\frac{360}{\text{gcd}(n,360)}\right) = 1 . One can see very easily that gcd ( n , 360 ) \text{gcd}(n,360) is at least 8 8 . Or n n is a multiple of 8 8 and it is given that n < 90 n<90 . So, n n can take the following values - 8 , 16 , 24 , 32 , 40 , 48 , 56 , 64 , 72 , 80 , 88 8,16, 24, 32, 40, 48, 56, 64, 72, 80, 88

Case 2 - k k is odd

2 m n = 360 k 180 n 2 m n 180 n ( m o d 360 ) \displaystyle 2^m n = 360k - 180 - n \Rightarrow 2^m n \equiv 180-n \pmod{360}

Let us define n = 180 n n' = 180 - n , then 2 m ( 180 n ) n ( m o d 360 ) 2^m (180 - n') \equiv n' \pmod{360}

m m is a positive integer, hence, 2 m n n ( m o d 360 ) -2^m n' \equiv n' \pmod{360}

And if gcd ( n , 360 ) = 1 \text{gcd}(n,360) = 1 then our equation becomes 2 m 1 ( m o d 360 ) 2^m \equiv -1 \pmod{360} which has no solutions since gcd ( m , 360 ) 1 \text{gcd}(m,360) \neq 1 .

Hence, gcd ( n , 360 ) 1 \text{gcd}(n',360) \neq 1 , it is such that gcd ( m , 360 gcd ( n , 360 ) ) = 1 \text{gcd}\left(m,\frac{360}{\text{gcd}(n',360)}\right) = 1 . One can see very easily that gcd ( n , 360 ) \text{gcd}(n',360) is at least 8 8 . But now, not all multiples give the answer and experimentation(or probably programming) tells us that only n = 8 15 , 8 18 , 8 20 n' = 8*15, 8*18, 8*20 gives us the answer. So, n = 180 n n = 180 - n' takes up the values 20 , 36 , 60 20, 36, 60 . I don't know how to find this thing. Anyone can help?

As a result, we have 14 14 solutions namely 8 , 16 , 20 , 24 , 32 , 36 , 40 , 48 , 56 , 60 , 64 , 72 , 80 , 88 8,16, 20, 24, 32, 36, 40, 48, 56, 60, 64, 72, 80, 88 .

@Otto Bretscher Can you give me any hints on how to find solutions of Case 2 in a better way?

Kartik Sharma - 5 years, 9 months ago

Log in to reply

Very nice! Thanks! I did it in essentially the same way; maybe somebody else has a more elegant solution.

I wrote the second case as n ( 2 m + 1 ) = ( 2 k 1 ) 180 n(2^m+1)=(2k-1)180 for some positive integer k k , or, after division by 4, we have n 4 ( 2 m + 1 ) = ( 2 k 1 ) 45 \frac{n}{4}(2^m+1)=(2k-1)45 . The LHS must be divisible by 45. Since 2 m 2^m is always congruent to 1, 2, 4, or 8 ( m o d 15 ) \pmod{15} , the factor 2 m + 1 2^m+1 cannot be divisible by 45 or even 15. If 2 m + 1 2^m+1 is divisible by 9 (when m = 3 m=3 , for example), then n 4 \frac{n}{4} must be an odd multiple of 5 , so n = 20 n=20 or n = 60 n=60 . If 2 m + 1 2^m+1 is divisible by 5 (when m = 2 m=2 , for example), then n 4 \frac{n}{4} must be an odd multiple of 9, so n = 36 n=36 since n < 90 n<90 .

I wrote your first case as n ( 2 m 1 ) = 360 k n(2^m-1)=360k . Now n n must be divisible by 8 and we can write n 8 ( 2 m 1 ) = 45 k \frac{n}{8}(2^m-1)=45k . We can let m = λ ( 45 ) = 12 m=\lambda(45)=12 [so that 2 12 1 ( m o d 45 ) 2^{12}\equiv{1}\pmod{45} ] to see that n n can be any multiple of 8, so n = 8 , 16 , . . . , 80 , 88 n=8,16,...,80,88 . See this .

Otto Bretscher - 5 years, 9 months ago

Log in to reply

Oh thanks! You eased it a lot! Now, it looks so obvious.

Kartik Sharma - 5 years, 9 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...