Richard Feynman was fascinated by the equation cos ( 2 0 ∘ ) cos ( 4 0 ∘ ) cos ( 8 0 ∘ ) = 2 3 1 , which he named "Morrie's Law" after a childhood friend, Morrie Jacobs, who told him the rule. More generally, how many positive integers n < 9 0 are there such that k = 0 ∏ m − 1 cos ( 2 k n ∘ ) = 2 m 1 for some positive integer m ?
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.
@Otto Bretscher Can you give me any hints on how to find solutions of Case 2 in a better way?
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 ) 1 8 0 for some positive integer k , or, after division by 4, we have 4 n ( 2 m + 1 ) = ( 2 k − 1 ) 4 5 . The LHS must be divisible by 45. Since 2 m is always congruent to 1, 2, 4, or 8 ( m o d 1 5 ) , the factor 2 m + 1 cannot be divisible by 45 or even 15. If 2 m + 1 is divisible by 9 (when m = 3 , for example), then 4 n must be an odd multiple of 5 , so n = 2 0 or n = 6 0 . If 2 m + 1 is divisible by 5 (when m = 2 , for example), then 4 n must be an odd multiple of 9, so n = 3 6 since n < 9 0 .
I wrote your first case as n ( 2 m − 1 ) = 3 6 0 k . Now n must be divisible by 8 and we can write 8 n ( 2 m − 1 ) = 4 5 k . We can let m = λ ( 4 5 ) = 1 2 [so that 2 1 2 ≡ 1 ( m o d 4 5 ) ] to see that n can be any multiple of 8, so n = 8 , 1 6 , . . . , 8 0 , 8 8 . See this .
Log in to reply
Oh thanks! You eased it a lot! Now, it looks so obvious.
Problem Loading...
Note Loading...
Set Loading...
Great problem! No wonder why it could fascinate even Mr. Feynman!
k = 0 ∏ m − 1 c o s ( 2 k n ∘ ) = 2 m 1
LHS becomes
2 m s i n ( n ∘ ) 1 2 s i n ( n ∘ ) c o s ( n ∘ ) k = 1 ∏ m − 1 2 c o s ( 2 k n ∘ )
Repeatedly using 2 s i n ( x ) c o s ( x ) = s i n ( 2 x ) ,
= 2 m s i n ( n ∘ ) s i n ( 2 m n ∘ )
implies that
2 m s i n ( n ∘ ) s i n ( 2 m n ∘ ) = 2 m 1 ⇒ s i n ( 2 m n ∘ ) = s i n ( n ∘ )
⇒ 2 m n = 1 8 0 k + ( − 1 ) k n for some positive integer k .
Now, it becomes a number theory problem. We'll take up the 2 possible cases
Case 1 - k is even
2 m n = 3 6 0 k + n ⇒ 2 m n ≡ n ( m o d 3 6 0 )
If gcd ( n , 3 6 0 ) = 1 then our equation becomes 2 m ≡ 1 ( m o d 3 6 0 ) which has no solutions since gcd ( m , 3 6 0 ) = 1 .
Hence, gcd ( n , 3 6 0 ) = 1 , it is such that gcd ( m , gcd ( n , 3 6 0 ) 3 6 0 ) = 1 . One can see very easily that gcd ( n , 3 6 0 ) is at least 8 . Or n is a multiple of 8 and it is given that n < 9 0 . So, n can take the following values - 8 , 1 6 , 2 4 , 3 2 , 4 0 , 4 8 , 5 6 , 6 4 , 7 2 , 8 0 , 8 8
Case 2 - k is odd
2 m n = 3 6 0 k − 1 8 0 − n ⇒ 2 m n ≡ 1 8 0 − n ( m o d 3 6 0 )
Let us define n ′ = 1 8 0 − n , then 2 m ( 1 8 0 − n ′ ) ≡ n ′ ( m o d 3 6 0 )
m is a positive integer, hence, − 2 m n ′ ≡ n ′ ( m o d 3 6 0 )
And if gcd ( n , 3 6 0 ) = 1 then our equation becomes 2 m ≡ − 1 ( m o d 3 6 0 ) which has no solutions since gcd ( m , 3 6 0 ) = 1 .
Hence, gcd ( n ′ , 3 6 0 ) = 1 , it is such that gcd ( m , gcd ( n ′ , 3 6 0 ) 3 6 0 ) = 1 . One can see very easily that gcd ( n ′ , 3 6 0 ) is at least 8 . But now, not all multiples give the answer and experimentation(or probably programming) tells us that only n ′ = 8 ∗ 1 5 , 8 ∗ 1 8 , 8 ∗ 2 0 gives us the answer. So, n = 1 8 0 − n ′ takes up the values 2 0 , 3 6 , 6 0 . I don't know how to find this thing. Anyone can help?
As a result, we have 1 4 solutions namely 8 , 1 6 , 2 0 , 2 4 , 3 2 , 3 6 , 4 0 , 4 8 , 5 6 , 6 0 , 6 4 , 7 2 , 8 0 , 8 8 .