13
$\begingroup$

I was just thinking about the equality (for a bit of fun)

$\lfloor ab \rfloor = \lfloor a\rfloor\lfloor b \rfloor$

for non-integer $a$ and $b$. I was wondering if anyone could point me to some lecture notes or something such where this features, since I can't find anything on google. Alternatively, is there some trivial condition that I'm overlooking? I've been scribbling away for a while just writing some things down and was wondering if anybody could tell me anything about the conditions to place on that equality?

My thought process was as follows: let $a = a_0.a_1a_2a_3...$ and $b=b_0.b_1b_2b_3...$. From this, we can write

$$a = a_0 + \sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n}\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ b = b_0 + \sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m}$$

and then

\begin{align} ab &= \left(a_0 + \sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n}\right) \left(b_0 + \sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m}\right)\\ &= a_0b_0 + b_0\sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n} + a_0\sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m} + \left(\sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n}\right)\left(\sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m}\right) \end{align}

and then we simply have that

$\lfloor a b \rfloor = \lfloor a \rfloor \lfloor b\rfloor$ iff $$0 < b_0\sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n} + a_0\sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m} + \left(\sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_k}{10^n}\right)\left(\sum_{m=1}^j \frac{b_m}{10^m}\right) <1$$

... more concsely, see @MorganRogers' answer for some better use of notation.

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $a$ and $b$ are positive, then $ab=\lfloor a\rfloor\lfloor{b}\rfloor+\lfloor{a}\rfloor\{b\}+\lfloor{b}\rfloor\{a\}+\{a\}\{b\}$, where $\{\cdot\}$ stands for fractional part. It follows that $\lfloor{ab}\rfloor\geq\lfloor{a}\rfloor\lfloor{b}\rfloor$, but if the rational parts of $a$ and $b$ are not to small, and the numbers $a$ and $b$ are large, the other terms will increase $\lfloor{ab}\rfloor$ a lot. $\endgroup$ Sep 14, 2016 at 18:30
  • $\begingroup$ @LuizCordeiro: You right ! I erased my post. Thank you for your comment. $\endgroup$
    – Surb
    Sep 14, 2016 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ @Surb Then not all is lost! $\endgroup$ Sep 14, 2016 at 18:34
  • $\begingroup$ Looks like the cross-multiplication got mixed up: you should have $a_0\sum_{n=1}^k \frac{b_k}{10^n}$ (Note different letters, $a$ vs. $b$), and so forth. $\endgroup$
    – David K
    Sep 14, 2016 at 20:01

4 Answers 4

5
$\begingroup$

As suggested in the comments, let's expand the LHS a little. I'll use $\langle a\rangle$ to represent the fractional part of $a$. $$\lfloor{ab}\rfloor = \lfloor{(\lfloor{a}\rfloor + \langle a\rangle)(\lfloor{b}\rfloor + \langle b\rangle)}\rfloor = \lfloor{a}\rfloor \lfloor{b}\rfloor + \big\lfloor \lfloor{a}\rfloor \langle b\rangle + \lfloor{b}\rfloor \langle a\rangle + \langle a \rangle \langle b\rangle \big\rfloor.$$

Thus a necessary and sufficient condition for the equation you propose to hold is that $$0 < \lfloor{a}\rfloor \langle b\rangle + \lfloor{b}\rfloor \langle a\rangle + \langle a \rangle \langle b\rangle < 1.$$

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Then my thoughts were correct, unfortunately I over-complicated it. I'm not very experienced in Number Theory so I forgot that the "fractional part" notation existed and instead just wrote $$a = a_0 + \sum_{n=1}^k \frac{a_n}{10^n}$$ and $b$ in a similar way. At least I arrived at the same conclusion. Thanks for your answer. $\endgroup$ Sep 14, 2016 at 18:41
  • $\begingroup$ Shouldn't it be 0 ≤ ... instead of 0 < ... $\endgroup$
    – gnasher729
    Sep 14, 2016 at 20:28
  • $\begingroup$ @gnasher729 I think you only get equality if $a, b \in \Bbb Z$, which I left out in the question $\endgroup$ Sep 14, 2016 at 21:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The fractional part can be defined as $\{x\}=\mod (x,1)$. The integer part can also be similarly defined as $\lfloor x\rfloor =x-\mod (x,1)$. A notation for the fractional part just hasn't been universally defined yet is all. $\endgroup$
    – Void
    Apr 5, 2020 at 3:48
  • $\begingroup$ $\lfloor{a}\rfloor \langle b\rangle + \lfloor{b}\rfloor \langle a\rangle + \langle a \rangle \langle b\rangle$ can be simplified to $ab - \lfloor a \rfloor \lfloor b \rfloor$. $\endgroup$ Nov 10, 2020 at 14:21
3
$\begingroup$

In the first quadrant, in the square tile $[A,A+1)\times[B,B+1)$, we have

$$\lfloor a\rfloor \lfloor b\rfloor=AB$$ and $$AB\le ab<(A+1)(B+1).$$

We are looking for the points such that

$$AB\le ab<AB+1,$$ which form a subset of the tile delimited by the equilateral hyperbola $$ab=AB+1.$$

For all tiles such that $AB=0$, the solutions cover the area $$0\le ab<1,$$ i.e. the space between the axis and $ab=1$.

For the other tiles, the intersections of the hyperbola with the edges are

$$\begin{align} a&=A\to &Ab=AB+1\to &b=B+\frac1A,\\ a&=A+1\to&(A+1)b=AB+1\to &b=\frac{AB+1}{A+1}\le B,\\ b&=B\to &aB=AB+1\to &b=A+\frac1B,\\ b&=B+1\to &a(B+1)=AB+1\to &b=\frac{AB+1}{B+1}\le A.\\ \end{align}$$

So the solution area is the inside of the curvilinear triangle with straight sides $a=A,b=B$ and the branch of hyperbola $ab=AB+1$, from $(A,B+1/A)$ to $(A+1/B,B)$. The area of the triangle is roughly proportional to $1/AB$.

The study will be similar for the other quadrants.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

We assume that $a$ and $b$ are nonnegative. Suppose that $m \le a < m + 1$ and $n \le b < n + 1$. Then $mn \le ab < (m+1)(n+1)$. So it is immediately true that $$ \lfloor a \rfloor \lfloor b \rfloor \le \lfloor ab \rfloor. $$ The two are equal if and only if additionally we have that $ab < mn + 1$. I.e., $$ a b - \lfloor a \rfloor \lfloor b \rfloor < 1 $$ If we want to write $a = m + r$, $b = n + s$, where $0 \le r, s, < 1$, then this becomes the statement that $$ ms + nr + rs < 1. $$ The $rs$ factor is bounded by both $r$ and $s$, so this expression is about $ms + nr$. Roughly speaking, this says that if $a$ and $b$ are large and around the order of $M$, then their fractional parts must add to at most $\frac{1}{2M}$.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

$a = [a] + \{a\}$ where $[a]$ is an integer and $0 \le \{a\} <1$.

So $[ab] = [[a][b] + [b]\{a\} + [a]\{b\} + \{a\}\{b\}] = [a][b] + [[b]\{a\} + [a]\{b\} + \{a\}\{b\}] = [a][b] \iff 0 \le [b]\{a\} + [a]\{b\} + \{a\}\{b\} < 1$

So we need among other things that $\{a\} < \frac 1b - \frac{[a]\{b\}}b$ and $\{b\} < \frac 1a - \frac{[b]\{a\}}a$.

That's quite a restriction.

Basically the larger the $a$ and $b$ are the fractional parts must be miniscule.

For example: if $a = 2\frac 14$ then $b < 4- 8\{b\});\{b\} < \frac 12;$ and $\{b\} < 4/9 - \frac{[b]}9$. So if, say $3 \le b < 4$ we'd have $\{b\} < 1/9$.

So $2.25$ and $3.1$ will do as $[2.25*3.1] = [6.975] = 6 = [2.25][3.1]$. See how close that got to failing?

$\endgroup$

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.