[math-fun] The sequence that gets densest in the circle the fastest
A propos the sunflower: Let a circle have unit circumference: C = R/Z, and let tau be (sqrt(5)-1)/2. For any sequence S = {x_n in C | n=1,2,3,...}, define M_n(S) as the length of the largest arc of C in the complement of {x_1,...,x_n}. Claim (?): The sequence in C S_tau := {x_n := n*tau (mod Z) | n=1,2,3,...} is the (unique ?) sequence S whose maximum gap M_n(S), as a function of n, decreases *in some sense* faster than that of any other sequence in C. Of course, there are sequences T for which M_n(T) = 1/n (the minimum possible and for n > 1 always < M_n(S_tau)) for an unbounded set of values of n. SO: Can someone state the claim rigorously and correctly? --Dan ________________________________________________________________________________________ It goes without saying that .
On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 2:17 AM, Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
A propos the sunflower:
Let a circle have unit circumference: C = R/Z, and let tau be (sqrt(5)-1)/2.
For any sequence S = {x_n in C | n=1,2,3,...}, define M_n(S) as the length of the largest arc of C in the complement of {x_1,...,x_n}.
Claim (?): The sequence in C
S_tau := {x_n := n*tau (mod Z) | n=1,2,3,...}
is the (unique ?) sequence S whose maximum gap M_n(S), as a function of n, decreases *in some sense* faster than that of any other sequence in C.
Of course, there are sequences T for which M_n(T) = 1/n (the minimum possible and for n > 1 always < M_n(S_tau)) for an unbounded set of values of n.
SO: Can someone state the claim rigorously and correctly?
Here's a way to define what is meant by the "best" sequence. I have no idea whether S_tau is the best sequence under this definitions, but it might be. Define the best sequence as the one that minimizes lim sup(n M_n(S)) The series that divides the circle into k equal parts, then divides those parts into k equal parts, and so forth, is better than the golden sequence at powers of k, but it's much worse at numbers slightly less than a power of k. The golden ratio sequence is never perfect, but it's never really bad; any sequence which has an infinite series of "bad" values of n will have a larger lim sup. I have no idea how to go about proving that the golden ratio sequence is the best by this measure. But it seems plausible to me. Andy
participants (2)
-
Andy Latto -
Dan Asimov