Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We have two equidistributed sequences {n a} and {n b} (mod 1), in which a and b are irrational.

1) Is it true that the sum {na} + {nb} is equidistributed?


2) Is it true that {na} + {nb} = {n(a+b)} ?

For (1), n*a and n*b are both polynomials satisfying Weyl's criteria, and so the sum of these is I think also a polynomial satisfying the criteria (but this does not necessarily mean {na} + {nb} is equidistributed). For (2), well, I just tried a few calculations, so I am not sanguine about it but it seems true. Note: I do see that a + b might not be irrational, and in that case we would not satisfy Weyl's criteria in (2).

Thanks for any insights.

share|cite|improve this question
"For (1), both expressions are polynomials...." No, $\lbrace na\rbrace$ is not a polynomial. – Gerry Myerson Feb 1 '12 at 5:02
@GerryMyerson: hopefully the edit helped. – daniel Feb 2 '12 at 19:43
up vote 6 down vote accepted

(1): Not necessarily.

  • We could take $a$ to be any irrational number in $(0,1)$ and $b=1-a$. In this case, for all $n>0$, $na+nb=n$ and $\{na\}+\{nb\}=1$.

  • If 1, $a$ and $b$ are linearly independent over $\Bbb Q$, then by the Weyl equidistribution criterion, the sequence of points $(\{na\},\{nb\})$ will be equidistributed in the unit square. This means that $\{na\}+\{nb\}$ will not be equidistributed in the interval $[0,2]$ but will have a triangular probability density function, with maximum density at 1.

On the other hand, if $a=b$ and $a$ is irrational, then $\{na\}+\{nb\}=2\{na\}$ will be equidistributed in $[0,2]$, because $\{na\}$ is equidistributed in $[0,1]$. Also, it is possible for $\{na\}+\{nb\}$ to be equidistributed in a subinterval of $[0,2]$. For example, if $a=\sqrt{2}$, $b=-1/\sqrt{2}$, set $z:=\{nb\}$; then $na=-2nb$, so $$\{na\}+\{nb\}=\{-2z\}+z=\left\{ \begin{array}{l} 1-z, \qquad z\in(0,\frac12],\\ 2-z, \qquad z\in(\frac12,1]. \end{array} \right.$$ Since $z$ is equidistributed in $[0,1]$, it follows that $\{na\}+\{nb\}$ is equidistributed in $[\frac12,\frac32]$.

(2): Both $\{\{na\}+\{nb\}\}$ and $\{n(a+b)\}$ are integer translates of $na+nb$ which are in $[0,1)$, so $\{\{na\}+\{nb\}\}=\{n(a+b)\}$. However, $\{na\}+\{nb\}$ and $\{n(a+b)\}$ may differ by 1. For example, if you take $a=1/\sqrt{2}$, $b=1/\sqrt{2}$ and $n=1$, then $\{na\}+\{nb\}=2/\sqrt{2}=\sqrt{2}$, but $\{n(a+b)\}=\{\sqrt{2}\}=\sqrt{2}-1$.

share|cite|improve this answer
In fact, if $a+b=k/m$ is rational, $\{n(a+b)\} $ takes only $m$ different values, and since $\{na\} + \{nb\}$ is either $\{n(a+b)\}$ or $\{n(a+b)\}+1$, that takes at most $2m$ different values. – Robert Israel Feb 1 '12 at 1:48

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.