William Lowell Putnam Competition
Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
William Lowell Putnam Competition
Anyone here write it?
How did you do, any advice for me wanting to write it next year.
I am going through some old ones, they are kinda hard... lol
How did you do, any advice for me wanting to write it next year.
I am going through some old ones, they are kinda hard... lol
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
 skeptical scientist
 closedminded spiritualist
 Posts: 6142
 Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
 Location: San Francisco
I haven't participated in either of the last two years (graduated), but I did for the 3 years before that. I pretty consistently got a score of around 3540.
My advice is to practice by solving lots of problems (there are sites with long lists of old Putnam problems, and other similar problems, e.g. IMO). Also, it's good to be as broadly educated as possible; while in principle they're generally all solvable with high school math, it never hurts to have some group theory or analysis up your sleeve, or combinatorics, or whatever.
My advice is to practice by solving lots of problems (there are sites with long lists of old Putnam problems, and other similar problems, e.g. IMO). Also, it's good to be as broadly educated as possible; while in principle they're generally all solvable with high school math, it never hurts to have some group theory or analysis up your sleeve, or combinatorics, or whatever.
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson
In each of the past two years, I answered 7 questions and got 69 of the 70 points, and I think what helped me the most was being able to write succinct, rigorous proofs quickly. Know exactly what constitutes a proof of something, know good ways of proving certain types of statements, know how to write clearly, know effective terminology, know what things you can leave to the grader, and so on. Be familiar enough with this so that when you do solve a problem, you can write up the solution quickly without fumbling around in the details. As you might expect, a good way to practice this is to write up solutions to lots of problems.

 Posts: 59
 Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:02 am UTC
 Cosmologicon
 Posts: 1806
 Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
 Location: Cambridge MA USA
 Contact:
I thought that the test oscillated between easy and hard years, so it surprises me that you three were so consistent. By a huge margin my best score was a 30 (answering, I think, A1, A2, and A3) in a very easy year (meaning the median was 1 rather than 0). I thought that was pretty good, haha. What rank does scoring 69 give you?
I think it would be a huge help to expose yourself to the kinds of tricks that the answers often involve. So be sure to read plenty of solutions as well as questions.
I think it would be a huge help to expose yourself to the kinds of tricks that the answers often involve. So be sure to read plenty of solutions as well as questions.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
I've gotten a 38 for the past two years (woo consistency!), and I agree with everyone else here: read lots of math. For instance, A2 this year was a question about a deterministic game played by two players, Alice and Bob. If you've read a lot about combinatorial game theory, you know exactly how to approach these problems: classify each position as a first player or second player win, and work your way up by noting that a position is a first player win (sometimes denoted an "Nposition") if it's possible to move to a second player win position ("Pposition"), and a Pposition if it's only possible to move to Npositions. After a couple minutes of looking at the small cases, a pattern pops out, and then you've already got the machinery to produce an inductive argument.
I think reading is probably more helpful than practicing (I usually find old exams too disheartening. It's easier to get motivated when you've already invested six hours of your life to doing well.), although it's good to still be in the habit of writing up proofs. If you haven't taken a math course in a while, you might want to write up a few easy problems just to remind yourself how to be rigorous. That said, a buddy of mine who consistently scores in the top 100 carries a practice book with him to glance through in his spare time, and the fact that he regularly kicks my ass is probably related to that fact.
I think reading is probably more helpful than practicing (I usually find old exams too disheartening. It's easier to get motivated when you've already invested six hours of your life to doing well.), although it's good to still be in the habit of writing up proofs. If you haven't taken a math course in a while, you might want to write up a few easy problems just to remind yourself how to be rigorous. That said, a buddy of mine who consistently scores in the top 100 carries a practice book with him to glance through in his spare time, and the fact that he regularly kicks my ass is probably related to that fact.
 skeptical scientist
 closedminded spiritualist
 Posts: 6142
 Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
 Location: San Francisco
3.14159265... wrote:I was pretty surprised on the 69 too. (edit: just realized the freudean slip here)
Btw how can I find the scores at my university?
Whether or not you can find out online depends on your university. You could check the math deparment news page (that's where I found my scores). If they aren't there, you probably have to ask whichever math prof at your school is responsible for proctoring the exam (or if you have a team, ask the coach.)
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson
 Cosmologicon
 Posts: 1806
 Joined: Sat Nov 25, 2006 9:47 am UTC
 Location: Cambridge MA USA
 Contact:
Okay, I checked out my university's website. Have you tried a Google search for "putnam scores [university name]"? It was the first hit for me. I was mistaken that my best score was 30; my best score was actually 20:
I probably also took it in 2001 but didn't do well enough to be listed. I guess my point is you really can't compare scores from different years, although I'm willing to say that skeptical scientist and Cauchy definitely did much better than I ever did.
Code: Select all
year score rank %ile
1998 30 410/2581 15.9%
1999 10 729/2900 25.2%
2000 20 245/2818 8.7%
I probably also took it in 2001 but didn't do well enough to be listed. I guess my point is you really can't compare scores from different years, although I'm willing to say that skeptical scientist and Cauchy definitely did much better than I ever did.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
 skeptical scientist
 closedminded spiritualist
 Posts: 6142
 Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:09 am UTC
 Location: San Francisco
My scores in Cosmo's format:
Rank, here, means the average rank of people who had the same score as me, which explains why they are not all integers.
So even though my score was fairly consistent, similar scores had quite different percentile rankings in different years.
While I was browsing through old scores, I noticed that in 2002, some people had scores of 40.9, 40.8, 40.7, etc. I thought scores were always whole numbers of points. Does anyone know what that was about?
By the way, here's an interesting article I found on the exam, for those who don't already know what it is (or those who do, but are interested in what kind of article a reporter for Time magazine would write on the story): Time Magazine article in the archive.
Code: Select all
year score rank %ile
2002 37 276/3349 8.2%
2003 40 117.5/3615 3.3%
2004 34 252.5/3733 6.8%
Rank, here, means the average rank of people who had the same score as me, which explains why they are not all integers.
So even though my score was fairly consistent, similar scores had quite different percentile rankings in different years.
While I was browsing through old scores, I noticed that in 2002, some people had scores of 40.9, 40.8, 40.7, etc. I thought scores were always whole numbers of points. Does anyone know what that was about?
By the way, here's an interesting article I found on the exam, for those who don't already know what it is (or those who do, but are interested in what kind of article a reporter for Time magazine would write on the story): Time Magazine article in the archive.
I'm looking forward to the day when the SNES emulator on my computer works by emulating the elementary particles in an actual, physical box with Nintendo stamped on the side.
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson
"With math, all things are possible." —Rebecca Watson

 Posts: 59
 Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:02 am UTC
Putnam Competition?
I'm taking part in the Putnam Competition on Saturday and I was wondering if anyone here had any tips or warnings... Anyone?
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I scored a 31.7 last year, just good enough to break the top 200. I got that taking only the second half of the test (stupid math GRE scheduling), but probably would not have done much better even with the first half, after looking at it. I would say that practicing off of old tests is in some ways useful (get an idea for the problemsolving mentality and general proof techniques) but unuseful in that specific concepts are supposed to never show up on the test twice. As someone else suggested, doing a lot of problem and studying basic proofwriting techniques is probably going to be the most useful.
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I'd like to do it after I've got some more math under my belt... That would be cool.
What's the difference between the A and B questions? Also, people keep referring to questions as "the A2 question"; is there some sort of consistency between what A2 (for example) is each year?
What's the difference between the A and B questions? Also, people keep referring to questions as "the A2 question"; is there some sort of consistency between what A2 (for example) is each year?
Code: Select all
_=0,w=1,(*t)(int,int);a()??<char*p="[gd\
~/d~/\\b\x7F\177l*~/~djal{x}h!\005h";(++w
<033)?(putchar((*t)(w??(p:>,w?_:0XD)),a()
):0;%>O(x,l)??<_='['/7;{return!(x%(_11))
?x??'l:x^(1+ ++l);}??>main(){t=&O;w=a();}
Re:
Buttons wrote:A2 this year was a question about a deterministic game played by two players, Alice and Bob.
I was a grader for the guy that wrote that question
My advice: Have fun! Most of the questions come down to some trick, so scour your old math books for little weird quirky things and think of how you would use them to write a putnam style question. When you're working on the problems, try coming at the problem in some weird way, or put it into another context, just to get used to manipulating questions around.
Oh, and don't cheat yourself and look at the solutions for old problems unless you've worked on it for like, 3 days at least
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/mudge < buy my CD (Now back in stock!)
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
There are two sets of questions, 6 problems each, 3 hours each. Section A, you have A1,A2, etc. and likewise with B, there is no substantive difference between A questions and B questions, and there is no real consistency with any given question number from year to year, but in general the lower numbers are easier than the higher ones. In my experience, I can usually do 2, 3, or 4 of A1, A2, B1, B2 and if I'm lucky, one or two of the rest. One piece of advice that somebody else mentioned earlier, and I'd agree with is to do one problem at a time, and make sure you finish that problem. The only scores given out on problems are 0,1,2,8,9,10, and you're only gonna get an 8, 9, or 10 if you have a very nearly complete solution. So submitting a complete, correct for one problem is far preferable to submitting 4 halfassed solutions.
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I don't remember my exact scores (I think I pulled a little over 30 for two of the three years I tried it [19971999], and a little over 20 for the other), but I know I finished between 200th and 500th each time.
Probably my most humbling Putnam moment was when I tried a B6 problem that read something like this: "Show that for any integers a, b, c we can find a positive integer n such that n^{3} + a*n^{2} + b*n + c is not a perfect square. " I had plenty of time after nailing a really easy one and whiffing on the others, so I actually tried to brute force this one, using mod 4 residues.
I don't remember if I got credit for it, but the humbling part came when I read a website that solved it in two lines (link is to problem set itself, not solution).
Probably my most humbling Putnam moment was when I tried a B6 problem that read something like this: "Show that for any integers a, b, c we can find a positive integer n such that n^{3} + a*n^{2} + b*n + c is not a perfect square. " I had plenty of time after nailing a really easy one and whiffing on the others, so I actually tried to brute force this one, using mod 4 residues.
I don't remember if I got credit for it, but the humbling part came when I read a website that solved it in two lines (link is to problem set itself, not solution).
Re: Re:
As are a lot of people, I'm taking it tomorrowgood luck everybody!
Also, that kalva.demon.co.uk site will CRUSH your willpower if you rely on not having a way to look up the solution in order to motivate yourself. It contains nearly all Putnams. Consider yourself warned.
So... you're saying that the guy who wrote this question once took the exam himself, and you graded his Putnam paper way back then?
Wow.
Also, that kalva.demon.co.uk site will CRUSH your willpower if you rely on not having a way to look up the solution in order to motivate yourself. It contains nearly all Putnams. Consider yourself warned.
mudge wrote:Buttons wrote:A2 this year was a question about a deterministic game played by two players, Alice and Bob.
I was a grader for the guy that wrote that question
So... you're saying that the guy who wrote this question once took the exam himself, and you graded his Putnam paper way back then?
Wow.
SargeZT wrote:Oh dear no, I love penguins. They're my favorite animal ever besides cows.
The reason I would kill penguins would be, no one ever, ever fucking kills penguins.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I am taking it tommorow.
Everybody, please do really bad, so I can stand out
It should be fun, free lunch, math, coffee perhaps, whats there not to like.
Here is a warmer: If two real numbers x,y are chosen at random from (0,1), using the value Pi, express the probability that the closest integer to x/y is even.
Do not confuse closest integer with roof or floor function.
Oh and ENJOY fellow future mathematicians.
Everybody, please do really bad, so I can stand out
It should be fun, free lunch, math, coffee perhaps, whats there not to like.
Here is a warmer: If two real numbers x,y are chosen at random from (0,1), using the value Pi, express the probability that the closest integer to x/y is even.
Do not confuse closest integer with roof or floor function.
Oh and ENJOY fellow future mathematicians.
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
3.14159265... wrote:I am taking it tommorow.
Everybody, please do really bad, so I can stand out
It should be fun, free lunch, math, coffee perhaps, whats there not to like.
Here is a warmer: If two real numbers x,y are chosen at random from (0,1), using the value Pi, express the probability that the closest integer to x/y is even.
Do not confuse closest integer with roof or floor function.
Oh and ENJOY fellow future mathematicians.
That statement would've been even more awesome if a standard synonym for 'mathematicians' were 'functionologists.'
Also: They give you free lunch and coffee? Where do you go?
Although maybe they do here too. Our adviser hasn't exactly waxed eloquent about testday procedures.
I'll get back to you on that warmup. 30 seconds isn't enough.
SargeZT wrote:Oh dear no, I love penguins. They're my favorite animal ever besides cows.
The reason I would kill penguins would be, no one ever, ever fucking kills penguins.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
Well, I think we are getting lunch (Supervisor's treat).
Coffee was my own, but you know, coffee is worth WAY more than they charge
Coffee was my own, but you know, coffee is worth WAY more than they charge
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
Regarding your problem,
Spoiler:
SargeZT wrote:Oh dear no, I love penguins. They're my favorite animal ever besides cows.
The reason I would kill penguins would be, no one ever, ever fucking kills penguins.
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
3.14159265... wrote:Here is a warmer: If two real numbers x,y are chosen at random from (0,1), using the value Pi, express the probability that the closest integer to x/y is even.
If I didn't do anything silly:
Spoiler:
Explanation:
Spoiler:
About the main question, I did the Putnam back in the early 90s. I placed in the top 500 each time, but I don't remember where. I think in 1992 I might have been somewhere in the top 100? Someone with access to a math library can look it up in the appropriate edition of The American Mathematical Monthly. (http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=00029890(199210)99%3A8%3C715%3ATFWLPM%3E2.0.CO%3B25 suggests Vol. 99, No. 8 (Oct., 1992), pp. 715724 might be a good place to look.)
PS Oh, and good luck to everyone taking it tomorrow!
Some of us exist to find out what can and can't be done.
Others exist to hold the beer.
Re: Re:
Pathway wrote:As are a lot of people, I'm taking it tomorrowgood luck everybody!
Also, that kalva.demon.co.uk site will CRUSH your willpower if you rely on not having a way to look up the solution in order to motivate yourself. It contains nearly all Putnams. Consider yourself warned.mudge wrote:Buttons wrote:A2 this year was a question about a deterministic game played by two players, Alice and Bob.
I was a grader for the guy that wrote that question
So... you're saying that the guy who wrote this question once took the exam himself, and you graded his Putnam paper way back then?
Wow.
Nono, he's a professor, and I graded homework he assigned to his students.
http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/mudge < buy my CD (Now back in stock!)
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
DAMN, I can't sleep .
Stupid Putnam contest, why must you be so much fun.
Its 1, and I am still up. DAMN!
Stupid Putnam contest, why must you be so much fun.
Its 1, and I am still up. DAMN!
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
So, if we took the test are we allowed to talk about it? I'm a freshmen and was pretty over my head, but I think I got a couple answers. Though I would love to find out what exactly we were supposed to do for the (3k+1) sum problem... but, again, maybe we aren't supposed to talk about it...
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
MiloKam wrote:So, if we took the test are we allowed to talk about it? I'm a freshmen and was pretty over my head, but I think I got a couple answers. Though I would love to find out what exactly we were supposed to do for the (3k+1) sum problem... but, again, maybe we aren't supposed to talk about it...
I don't think you're supposed to talk about it until after Sun 2nd. At least thats what I read on mathlinks
mosc wrote:How did you LEARN, exactly, to suck?
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I imagine some people couldn't take it today for religious reasons, so it's probably best to wait a bit.
Jerry Bona wrote:The Axiom of Choice is obviously true; the Well Ordering Principle is obviously false; and who can tell about Zorn's Lemma?
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
So how'd everyone do? I guess we didn't contract not to talk about the questions afterwards, so we're probably ok if anyone wants to speak in depth.
B1 was kinda easy. I think I had almost a valid proof on A6 too. Otherwise I definitely need to learn a bit more about stuff.
B1 was kinda easy. I think I had almost a valid proof on A6 too. Otherwise I definitely need to learn a bit more about stuff.
SargeZT wrote:Oh dear no, I love penguins. They're my favorite animal ever besides cows.
The reason I would kill penguins would be, no one ever, ever fucking kills penguins.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I got A3, and B1.
Almost got A2, A4, B5 and A5.
I am mad, If I had another 9 hours, I coulda done it.
MiloKam do you know what congruences are?
Consider if you only had elements of the 1 residue class and the 2 residue class.
Almost got A2, A4, B5 and A5.
I am mad, If I had another 9 hours, I coulda done it.
MiloKam do you know what congruences are?
Consider if you only had elements of the 1 residue class and the 2 residue class.
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
 BaldAdonis
 Posts: 81
 Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:32 pm UTC
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
3.14159265... wrote:I got A3, and B1....
I think I messed up B2. That triangle solution doesn't work unless f(0)=0, but you know that for some x, f(x)=0, so I could've fixed it. This is the worst part of the Putnam: the long walk home when you pick apart your answers and find the mistakes.
 3.14159265...
 Irrational (?)
 Posts: 2413
 Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:05 am UTC
 Location: Ajax, Canada
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
Hm... maybe they will think it was obvious
I am now starting to get mad over the hyperbola one, I just realized I had seen that proof before.......
I am now starting to get mad over the hyperbola one, I just realized I had seen that proof before.......
"The best times in life are the ones when you can genuinely add a "Bwa" to your "ha"" Chris Hastings
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
I don't remember which numbers were which for the most part, so I'm going to just reference problems descriptively
Primarily, does anyone know if the solution for the hyperbola one is actually 'Area=4,' or if that's just the "obvious" wrong answer?
If anyone who didn't take the test is interested, the problem was to find the minimun area of a convex set in the plane that intersects both branches of xy=1, and both branches of xy=1.
As for solved problems, I was able to solve the prime elements problem, the "n=1111..." problem, the f(n)  f(f(n)+1) problem, at least half of the tangent parabolas problem, and most of the "3k+1" probability*. The rest, mostly part B, were absolutely insane.
*A friend pointed out afterwards that I included an extra factor of k!. Hopefully that warrants some credit.
Primarily, does anyone know if the solution for the hyperbola one is actually 'Area=4,' or if that's just the "obvious" wrong answer?
If anyone who didn't take the test is interested, the problem was to find the minimun area of a convex set in the plane that intersects both branches of xy=1, and both branches of xy=1.
As for solved problems, I was able to solve the prime elements problem, the "n=1111..." problem, the f(n)  f(f(n)+1) problem, at least half of the tangent parabolas problem, and most of the "3k+1" probability*. The rest, mostly part B, were absolutely insane.
*A friend pointed out afterwards that I included an extra factor of k!. Hopefully that warrants some credit.
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
For A3(the repunit one), did anyone get that there were an infinte amount of f's? I figured that if you multiply n by a power of 10 and then add ("said power of ten"  1)/9 you would get another larger repunit. Because the repunit is an integer you don't have to worry about decimals... right?
Anyone with an answer for A3, please post! I worked so hard on it but my efforts were really in vain. It was the one about systematicly summing the numbers 1 thru 3k1 and the probability that none of the sums would be divisable by 3.
The B part was really redic, n'est pas? I tried B3 but I ended up just writing the equation to the power of 2007, which I'm very certain is wrong but I'm wondering how far off I am.
Anyone with an answer for A3, please post! I worked so hard on it but my efforts were really in vain. It was the one about systematicly summing the numbers 1 thru 3k1 and the probability that none of the sums would be divisable by 3.
The B part was really redic, n'est pas? I tried B3 but I ended up just writing the equation to the power of 2007, which I'm very certain is wrong but I'm wondering how far off I am.
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
merc wrote:I don't remember which numbers were which for the most part, so I'm going to just reference problems descriptively
Primarily, does anyone know if the solution for the hyperbola one is actually 'Area=4,' or if that's just the "obvious" wrong answer?
If anyone who didn't take the test is interested, the problem was to find the minimun area of a convex set in the plane that intersects both branches of xy=1, and both branches of xy=1.
Someone else from my school got 4 as well. He might've proved it by parameterizing the curves using sinh and cosh functions.
SargeZT wrote:Oh dear no, I love penguins. They're my favorite animal ever besides cows.
The reason I would kill penguins would be, no one ever, ever fucking kills penguins.
 BaldAdonis
 Posts: 81
 Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 11:32 pm UTC
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
MiloKam wrote:For A3(the repunit one), did anyone get that there were an infinte amount of f's? I figured that if you multiply n by a power of 10 and then add ("said power of ten"  1)/9 you would get another larger repunit. Because the repunit is an integer you don't have to worry about decimals... right?
Anyone with an answer for A3, please post! I worked so hard on it but my efforts were really in vain. It was the one about systematicly summing the numbers 1 thru 3k1 and the probability that none of the sums would be divisable by 3.
The B part was really redic, n'est pas? I tried B3 but I ended up just writing the equation to the power of 2007, which I'm very certain is wrong but I'm wondering how far off I am.
Repunits: There aren't an infinite number, you should just have f(x)=x, and any constant function equal to a repunit. So I guess there are an infinite number, but not the good kind of infinite.
3k+1: Consider arrangements of just the numbers congruent to 1 or 2 mod 3. The rest can go anywhere (except the first position), and the "1 or 2" numbers must be arranged so that you don't have an equal number at any point, and you don't have 3 more of one than the other at any point. Then you see that it has to go 1, 1, 2, 1, 2, 1, ... and alternate from then on. Then just permute the numbers into the right spaces (that's where I messed up).
2007: You should be able to work out a recursion of x_{n+1} = 4x_{n} 6x_{n1}, and solve that for a general formula.
I found the B part a lot easier, but that might have been the combination lunch/drinks/cigarette/tea that got me relaxed and into writing math. Solved the first two questions in 30 minutes...
Re: William Lowell Putnam Competition
Yes 4 is the answer. The solution is a bit more complicated. I'm too lazy to write it up (just minimize a function), but here are sketches for some of the other ones:merc wrote:Primarily, does anyone know if the solution for the hyperbola one is actually 'Area=4,' or if that's just the "obvious" wrong answer?
Spoiler:
Um. 10x+1?BaldAdonis wrote:Repunits: There aren't an infinite number, you should just have f(x)=x, and any constant function equal to a repunit. So I guess there are an infinite number, but not the good kind of infinite.
Anyone know a nice proof for the order p elements of a group one?
Jerry Bona wrote:The Axiom of Choice is obviously true; the Well Ordering Principle is obviously false; and who can tell about Zorn's Lemma?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests