Questions   
Sort: 
 #24
avatar+118723 
+1

In how many ways can 8 people be seated around a square table with 2 people on a side? (Two configurations are considered equivalent if one is a rotation of another.)

 

Since this question has been dredged back up I decided to pay with it again (just to check that i can still do it ).......

 

It reall depends on what the questioner means.

If you are treating the square table like a round table then there are (8-1)! = 5040

BUT If you rotate just one place then the pairs are different so this number is doubled

5040*2= 10080

This was Chris's original answer.

Our guest has just given you exactly the same solution, thanks for making it clear guest.  smiley

Our guests logic was a little different from mine but it is totalyy correct (both logic and answer)

------------------------------

 

If you only care about who is sitting in pairs and where the pairs are in relation to the otheraround the table (who is one the right or left does not matter) then the problem becomes different.

The answer would be who many pairs can be formed x how many ways can they be seated.

 

How many ways can the 4 pairs be seated = 3! =6

How many ways can they be fromed.

If there were only 2 people there would be 1 way.

If there were 4 people ABCD then AB, AC,AD  who A is with defines BOTH pairs so ther is 3 ways.

If people E and G join the mix  then if they are together then there are 3 ways.

Bur E could be with G or A or B or C or D   So that is 5 x3 ways.

By extention, if there are 8 people there are 7*5*3 = 105 ways they can be paired off. 

I remember someone told me the notation is 7!!

 

So the number of ways pairs can be chosen and the pairs seated at the table (If AB are a pair that is the same as BA)  is 105*6 = 630 ways.

 

If where in a pair, personApersonB is different from personBpersonA the number would be much bigger. I think then the number would be back to 10,080 again as I think it would be the same as the original problem ://

Dec 28, 2015
Dec 27, 2015
 #7
avatar
+10

Have just picked up mention of this problem from Melody's wrap, ... , looks interesting.

 

It's what's known as a fixed point iteration.

It can be written as

\(\displaystyle x_{n+1}=x_{n}+\sin x_{n}+\frac{1}{6}\sin^{3}x_{n}\) ,

(x rather than n, n suggests an integer).

Choose a starting value x0 for x, substitute into the rhs to calculate x1, substitute that back into the rhs to calculate x2 and so on. Providing that the process converges to some number, we have a solution, (a root) of the equation

\(\displaystyle x = x + \sin x + \frac{1}{6}\sin^{3}x\) .

Assuming that for a suitable starting value that this particular iteration converges to pi, (and it can be shown that it does), we can let

\(\displaystyle x_{n}=\pi + \epsilon_{n} \text{ and } x_{n+1}=\pi + \epsilon_{n+1}\) ,

where

\(\displaystyle \epsilon_{n} \text{ and } \epsilon_{n+1}\)

are the errors in successive iterates.

The object of the exercise is to determine an approximate relationship between them, since this tells us just how quickly the iteration is converging.

 

We have,

\(\displaystyle \sin x_{n}=\sin(\pi+\epsilon_{n})=-\sin \epsilon_{n}\),

and expanding by Maclaurin's series,

\(\sin x_{n} = -\left(\epsilon_{n}-\frac{\epsilon^{3}_{n}}{3!}+\frac{\epsilon^{5}_{n}}{5!}-\frac{\epsilon^{7}_{n}}{7!}+\dots\right)\).

From that, we find that

\(\displaystyle \sin^{3}x_{n} = -\left(\epsilon^{3}_{n}+\frac{60\epsilon^{5}_{n}}{5!}-\frac{546\epsilon^{7}_{n}}{7!}+\dots \right)\),

(nb. the easiest way of doing that on paper is to use the identity

\(\displaystyle \sin3A=3\sin A-4\sin^{3}A\) ).

 

Substituting into the iteration, and simplifying, 

(\(\displaystyle \text{the } \epsilon_{n} \text{ and } \epsilon^{3}_{n}\) terms on the rhs cancel out),

\(\displaystyle \epsilon_{n+1}=\frac{9}{5!}\epsilon^{5}_{n}-\frac{90}{7!}\epsilon^{7}_{n}+\dots\) (but check my arithmetic),

showing that the iteration has fifth order (quintic) convergence.

 

So, for this iteration with a starting value x0 = 3, meaning an initial error of about 0.14, we could expect an error in x1 to be roughly 9*0.14^5/120 = 0.000004 and for x2 roughly 9*0.000004^5/120, about 8e-29, and so on.

 

For comparison, Newton-Raphson is usually second order convergent. That is, the error of an iterate is roughly the square of the preceding one.

 

- Bertie

Dec 27, 2015

0 Online Users