Wikibooks Problems in Mathematics
From Wikibooks, the open-content textbooks collection
Problems are listed in the increasing order of difficulty. When a problem is simply a mathematical statement, the readers are supposed to supply a proof. Answers are given (or will be given) to all of problems. This is mostly for the quality control; the answers allow contributors other than the initial writer of the problem to check the validity of the problems. In other words, the readers are strongly discouraged to see the answers before they successfully solved the problems themselves.
Contents |
[edit] Commutative algebra
Problem: A finite integral domain is a field.
Let a be an element in the finite integral domain A. Then the map
is injective (since A is an integral domain) and is surjective by finiteness.
Problem: An integral domain is a PID if its prime ideals are principal. (Hint: apply Zorn's lemma to the set S of all non-principal prime ideals.)
Suppose, on the contrary, that S is nonempty. Then there is a a maximal element
. We will reach a contradiction once we show
. For that end, let
. If
, then, by maximality,
. That is, it is principal; say,
.
Let
be an ideal consisting of
such that
. It turns out that
.
Indeed,
. Conversely, if
, then z = z'd and
. Thus,
. We now conclude that
, for, otherwise,
is principal. 
Problem: A ring is noetherian if and only if its prime ideas are finitely generated. (Hint: Zorn's lemma.)
The direction (
) is obvious. For the converse, let S be the set of all proper ideals of A that are not finitely generated. We want to show S is empty then. Suppose not. Then, by Zorn's lemma, S contains a maximal element
. It follows that
is prime. To see that, let
. If
, then, by maximality,
. That is, it is finitely generated; say,
.
Let
be an ideal consisting of
such that
. It turns out that
.
In fact, if
, then
- z = b1(i1 + a1x) + ... + bn(in + anx)
Here,
. We conclude that
, for, otherwise,
and thus
are finitely generated.
Problem: Every nonempty set of prime ideals has a minimal element with respect to inclusion.
Problem: If an integral domain A is algebraic over a field F, then A is a field.
Since A is an integral domain, it is a subring of some field. Let
. Then u is invertible in
. 
Problem: Every two elements in a UFD have a gcd.
Problem: If
is a unit, then f − a0 is nilpotent, where a0 = f(0) is the constant term of f.
Let g = b0 + b1x + ... + bmxm be the inverse of f. Then anbm = 0. Since anbm − 1 + an − 1bm = 0, it follows
. By obvious induction, for some r, we see
kills every coefficient of g; hence, g. Thus,
, meaning an is nilpotent. Recall that the sum of a unit and a nilpotent element is a unit. Since anxn − f is a unit, by applying the above argument, we see that an − 1xn − 1 is nilpotent. In the end, we conclude that a0 − f is a sum of nilpotent elements; thus, nilpotent.
Problem: The nilradical and the Jacobson radical of A[X] coincide.
We only have to prove: if f is in the Jacobson radical, then f is nilpotent, since the converse is true for any ring. Recall that 1 − fg is a unit for every g. In particular, 1 − xf is unit. Now use the previous problem to conclude f is nilpotent.
Problem: Let A be a ring such that every ideal not contained in its nilradical contains an element e such that
. Then the nilradical and the Jacobson radical of A coincide.
In general, the nilradical is contained in the Jacobson radical. Suppose this inclusion is strict. Then by hypothesis there is a nonzero e such that e(1 − e) = 0. Since 1 − e is a unit, e = 0, a contradiction.
Problem:
is a unit if and only if the constant term of f is a unit.
[edit] Real analysis
Problem:
is irrational.
Let
. Then
. The equation can then be solved for

Problem: Is
irrational?
Problem: Compute 
Problem: If
exists, then
exists and 
Apply L'Hospital's rule to 
Problem Let X be a complete metric space, and
be a function such that
is a contraction. Then f admits a fixed point.
By Banach's fixed point theorem,
has a unique fixed point x0; i.e.,
. But then
In other words, f(x0) is also a fixed point of
. By uniqueness, x0 = f(x0). 
Problem Let X be a compact metric space, and
be such that
- d(f(x),f(y)) < d(x,y)
for all
. Then f admits a unique fixed point. (Do not use Banach's fixed point theorem.)
Let
. By compactness, there is x0 such that c = d(x0,f(x0)). If
, then, by hypothesis, we have:
,
which is absurd. Thus, d(x0,f(x0)) = 0. For uniqueness, suppose y0 = f(y0). If
, then
,
which is absurd. Hence, x0 is the unique fixed point. 
Problem Let X be a compact metric space, and
be a contraction. Then
consists of exactly one point.
Since f is a contraction, it admits a fixed point x0. Thus,
. Let
. Then
- y = f(x1) = f2(x2) = f3(x3) = ...
for some sequence x1,x2,.... Let c be the Lipschitz constant of f. Now,
which goes to 0 as
since d(f(x1),f(xn)) is bounded and c < 1 and since for any
by Banach's fixed point theorem. 
Problem: Every closed subset of
is separable.
Let En be a countable dense subset of
, and let
Then
. In fact, since Ek is a subset of A for any k,
and so
. Conversely, if
, then for some k,
.

Problem: Any connected nonempty subset of
either consists of a single point or contains an irrational number.
Let E be a connected nonempty subset of
. Then E is an interval with end-points a, b. If E has more than one point, then E contains a nonempty interval (a, b), which contains an irrational. 
Problem: Let
be a bounded function. f is continuous if and only if f has closed graph.
Problem Let
be a continuous function. Then
is continuous.
Let ε > 0. Since f is uniformly continuous, there is δ > 0 so that
- | f(x',y') − f(x,y) | < ε whenever | (x',y') − (x,y) | < δ
It follows that g(x) < ε + g(x') as well as g(x') < ε + g(x) when | x' − x | < δ. Hence,
- | g(x') − g(x) | < ε.

Problem Let
be continuous functions such that: f(g(x)) = g(f(x)) for every x. The equation f(f(x)) = g(g(x)) has a solution if and only if f(x) = g(x) has one.
(
) is trivial. For (
), suppose we have x so that f(f(x)) = g(g(x)). Define h(y) = f(y) − g(y) for
. Then
- h(f(x)) = f(f(x)) − g(f(x)) = g(g(x)) − f(g(x)) = − h(g(x)).
Thus, h(f(x)) + h(g(x)) = 0. If h(f(x)) = 0, then we are done. If h(f(x)) < 0, then, since h(g(x)) > 0, by the intermediate value theorem, h(z) = 0 for some z. The same argument works for the case when h(f(x)) > 0. 
Problem Suppose
is uniformly continuous. Then there are constants a,b such that:
for all
.
There exists δ > 0 such that
- | f(x) − f(y) | < 1 whenever | x − y | < δ.
Let
. Then
for some integer
. It follows:
Here,
. The estimate for x < 0 is analogous. 
Problem Let X be a compact metric space, and
be an isometry: i.e., d(f(x),f(y)) = d(x,y). Then f is a bijection.
f is clearly injective. To show f surjective, let
. Since X is compact, fn(x) contains a convergent subsequence, say,
. Then
In other words, x is in the closure of f(X). Since the image of a closed set under an isometry is closed, we conclude:
. 
Problem Let pn be a sequence of polynomials with degree ≤ some fixed D. If pn converges pointwise to 0 on [0, 1], then pn converges uniformly on [0, 1].
We first prove a weaker statement:
- If pn converges pointwise on all but finitely many points in [0,1], then pn converges uniformly on all but finitely many points in [0,1].
We proceed by inducting on D. If D = 1, then the claim is obvious. Suppose it is true for D - 1. We write:
- pn(x) = pn(x0) + (x − x0)qn(x)
where x0 is a point such that
. Since the degree of qn is strictly less than that of pn, by inductive hypothesis, qn converges uniformly on the complement of some finite subset F of [0, 1]. Thus, pn converges on the complement of
. This completes the proof of the claim. By the claim, pn converges uniformly except at some finitely many points. But since pn converges pointwise everywhere, it converges uniformly everywhere. 
Problem On a closed interval a monotone function has at most countably many discontinuous points.
[edit] Linear algebra
Throughout the section V denotes a finite-dimensional vector space over the field of complex numbers.
Problem Given an n, find a matrix with integer entries such that
but An = I
A permutation matrix. 
Problem Let A be a real symmetric positive-definite matrix and b some fixed vector. Let
. Then Az = b if and only if 
Note that A is invertible. Fix
and let f(t) = φ(A − 1b + tx). Then
Since f''(0) > 0, t = 0 is the minimum of f. 
Problem If
for all square matrices B, then A = 0
Take B = AT. 
Problem Let x be a square matrix over a field of characteristic zero. If
for all k > 0, then x is nilpotent.
We may assume the field is algebraically closed. Suppose x has nonzero distinct eigenvalues λ1,λ2,...,λn. The hypothesis then means that we have the system of linear equations:
Computing the determinant, we see the system has no nonzero solution, a contradiction.
Problem Let S,T be square matrices of the same size. Then ST and TS have the same eigenvalues.
Let λ be an eigenvalue of ST. If λ = 0, then 0 = det(ST) = det(TS). Thus, λ is an eigenvalue of TS. If
, then STx = λx for some nonzero x. Thus, (TS)Tx = λTx. Since Tx = 0 implies λx = 0, a contradiction, Tx is an eigenvector. Hence, λ is an eigenvalue of TS. We thus proved that every eigenvalue of ST is an eigenvalue of TS. By the same argument, every eigenvalue of TS is an eigenvalue of ST. 
Problem Let S,T be square matrices of the same size. Then ST and TS have the same eigenvalues with same multiplicity.
If S is invertible, then
- ST = S(TS)S − 1
and thus
.
If S is not invertible, then S + tI is invertible when t > 0 is sufficiently small. Thus,
and letting
gives the same identity. In any case, TS and ST share the same eigenvalues with same multiplicity.
Problem Let A be a square matrix over complex numbers. A is a real symmetric matrix if and only if
is real for every x.
(
) is obvious. (
) By hypothesis
Now recall that the numerical radius
is a norm. 
Problem Suppose the square matrix aij satisfies:
for all i. Then A is invertible.
Suppose Ax = 0. Then, in particular, each component of Ax is zero; i.e.,
The inequality
thus gives:
for all i. Pick k such that max{ | x1 | , | x2 | ,... | xn | } = | xk | . Then, by hypothesis,
,
which is absurd, unless | xk | = 0. Hence, x = 0. 
Problem Let
. If V is finite-dimensional, then prove TS is invertible if and only if ST is invertible. Is this also true when V is infinite-dimensional?
For the first part, use determinant. For the second, consider a shift operator. 
Problem: Let T,S be linear operators on V. Then
The map
is well-defined. Hence,
Problem Every matrix (over an arbitrary field) is similar to its transpose.
The shortest proof would be to use a Smith normal form: a matrix A is similar to another matrix "B if and only if XI − A and XI − B have the same Smith normal form. Evidently, this is the case if B is the transpose of A.
Problem Every nonzero eigenvalue of a skew-symmetric matrix is pure imaginary.
Problem If the transpose of a matrix A is zero, then A is similar to a matrix with the main diagonal consisting of only zeros.
Problem
for any square matrix A.
Problem: Every square matrix is similar to an upper-triangular matrix.
Jordan form or Schur form.
Problem: Let A be a normal matrix. Then A * is a polynomial in A.
Problem: Let A be a normal matrix. Then:
Problem: Let A be a square matrix. Then
(in operator norm) if and only if the spectral radius of A < 1
The Spectral radius formula.
Problem: Let A be a square matrix. Then 
Problem:
is a norm for bounded operators T on a "complex" Hilbert space.
It is clear that the map is a seminorm. To see it is a norm, suppose
for all x. In particular,
Combing the two we get:
for all x and y. Take y = Tx and we get Tx = 0 for all x.





![g(x) = \sup \{ f(x, y) | y \in [0, 1] \} \quad (x \in [0, 1])](http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/a/5/5/a55e7edb47d7cac3a61e61da2926454d.png)

















