1
$\begingroup$

Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ be a fixed positive integers and $B \in \mathbb{R}_+$ also be fixed. For a fixed $M>0$, let $f:[-B,B]^n \to \mathbb{R}$ be given by $f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=\sum_{i=1}^n x_i M^i$. My aim is to prove the following:

Prove that one can always find a fixed positive real number $M$ (dependent only on $B$ and $n$) such that $f$ is an injective map.

If such an $M$ does not exist in the above question, one can assume that each $x_i$ can take only a fixed set of countable values in $[-B,B]$. In other words, the map $f$ is defined only for a countable subset of $[-B,B]^n$. In this reduced case, can $f$ be injective?

My attempt: Let $f(x_1,\ldots,x_n)=f(y_1,\ldots,y_n)$ for some $(x_1,\ldots,x_n),(y_1,\ldots,y_n) \in [-B,B]^n$. Thus, $\sum_{i=1}^n (x_i-y_i)M^i=0$. After this step, I am stuck and unable to procced further about how to choose such an $M$ such that the above equation does't have any solution.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is it given that $a_i \neq b_i$ for all $1 \leq i \leq n$? $\endgroup$ – Noble Mushtak Mar 28 '16 at 22:50
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah.Or atleast one $a_i \neq b_i$. $\endgroup$ – pikachuchameleon Mar 28 '16 at 22:56
  • $\begingroup$ Are all the $a's$ and $b's$ specified in advance? Then you just have a polynomial with some non-zero coefficients. $\endgroup$ – lulu Mar 28 '16 at 23:07
  • $\begingroup$ @lulu: I edited the question a bit. Please check. $\endgroup$ – pikachuchameleon Mar 29 '16 at 18:16
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This doesn't work. If $M>1$ then take any $b_1\neq 0$ in the range and define $a_n=\frac {b_1}{M^{n-1}}$, all others $0$. If $M≤1$ then take $b_2\neq 0$ in the range and let $a_1=b_2\,M$, all others $0$. $\endgroup$ – lulu Mar 29 '16 at 18:25
0
$\begingroup$

The general statement is definitely false for $n > 1$. $f(0, 0)=0$, but we can also choose some $0 < \epsilon < \min(B, BM)$ so that $\left(-\epsilon, \frac \epsilon M\right) \in [-B, B]^2$ and thus in the domain of $f$. Thus, we have the following: $$f\left(-\epsilon, \frac \epsilon M\right)=-\epsilon M+\frac \epsilon M M^2=-\epsilon M+\epsilon M=0$$ Therefore, $f(0, 0)=f\left(-\epsilon, \frac \epsilon M\right)$ and $f$ is not injective.

However, I think the reduced statement is actually true. Let $D$ be the domain of $f$. For any two unequal ${\bf x}, {\bf y} \in D$, $f({\bf x})=f({\bf y})$ means that $\sum_{i=1}^n ({\bf x}_i-{\bf y}_i)M^i=0$. Since the left side of this equation is a non-zero polynomial of degree at most $n$ in terms of $M$, there are at most $n$ values of $M$ which satisfies this equality.

We have the following:

  • Since $D$ is countable, there are a countable number of pairs of unequal ${\bf x}, {\bf y} \in D$.
  • Given a specific pair of ${\bf x}, {\bf y} \in D$, there are a finite number of $M$ where $f({\bf x})=f({\bf y})$.

Therefore, overall, there are a countable set of $M$ where $f({\bf x})=f({\bf y})$ is true for any ${\bf x}, {\bf y} \in D$. On the other hand, there are an uncountable number of positive real numbers, so choose a positive number that is not in the described countable set. For this $M$, $f({\bf x}) \neq f({\bf y})$ for all ${\bf x}, {\bf y} \in D$, which means $f$ is injective.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I modified the question a bit. Please verify. $\endgroup$ – pikachuchameleon Mar 29 '16 at 18:16
  • $\begingroup$ @pikachuchameleon I have revised my answer. Does it answer your question? $\endgroup$ – Noble Mushtak Mar 29 '16 at 20:23
  • $\begingroup$ Yeah, more or less that resolves the question. But, how do you make sure that $\frac{\epsilon}{M} \leq B$ in the counter-example? $\endgroup$ – pikachuchameleon Mar 29 '16 at 22:35
  • $\begingroup$ $\epsilon$ can be any positive number, so we simply pick a $0 < \epsilon < BM$. If you want a specific example, $\epsilon=\frac{BM} 2$ works. $\endgroup$ – Noble Mushtak Mar 30 '16 at 0:15
  • $\begingroup$ Okay. Then how do you ensure that $BM/2 < B$. Remember that I want injectivity on the domain $[-B,B]$. Also, in the second part of the above solution regarding the reduced case, it doesn't matter if they are bounded right? I think your solution doesn't use that. $\endgroup$ – pikachuchameleon Mar 30 '16 at 14:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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