General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

Lapped runners and number theory

Started by Terry R. McConnell · · Last activity · 34 posts · 761 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
22 November 2004
Last activity
1 December 2004
Original author
Terry R. McConnell
Posts
34
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
761
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 34
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Math is everywhere one chooses to look for it: As a mathematician and
    mathematics teacher, I take that phrase very much to heart. I am happy
    whenever I encounter new mathematical issues, particularly when they arise
    in the world beyond mathematics and the sciences, and I take pleasure in
    sharing these observations with others. It is especially gratifying when
    mathematical ideas that I have talked about in class crop up in connection
    with running.

    This past summer I taught a course in elementary number theory for the first
    time, and for a while I despaired of finding any connection at all between
    our sport and the so called Queen of Mathematics.

    But never fear! Let's say I'm jogging on our 200m indoor track
    and I notice that I lap a group of walkers about every second lap. Can I
    explain this using some arithmetic ( beginning number theory) and
    some reasonable assumptions about our respective paces? (Perhaps I should
    define the verb "to lap" for those who are unfamiliar with it: Whenever a
    runner overtakes another runner on a track with both heading in the same
    direction, the overtaking runner is said to "lap" the other.)

    The key point here is that between my lappings of
    the group of walkers I have run exactly one more lap than they have walked.
    Since I've run two laps in that interval, they have walked one. Accordingly,
    I'm going twice as fast as they are. Now my jogging pace, if I'm honest about
    it, is between 8 and 9 minutes per mile (increasingly more toward the latter,)
    making their walking pace 16 to 18 minutes per mile -- quite reasonable for
    a group of fitness walkers. (Exercise: did the size of the track matter at
    all in the reasoning?)

    A few simple questions about runners moving at the same speed lead to more
    interesting issues.

    1) Suppose two runners start out together and travel at equal speed but in
    different lanes. Experience shows the runner in the inside lane will
    gradually pull ahead and eventually lap the outside runner, because it is
    further around the track in the outer lane. How far will the runners
    have gone when this lapping occurs? (Assume the lane numbers of the runners
    to be given.)

    2) Same question, but now we require that the lapping take place exactly
    at the point on the track where the runners started. That is, if the lapping
    from question 1 occurs somewhere on the far side of the track, as it may well
    do, then the runners continue on, perhaps lapping many times before meeting
    at the starting line.

    The dual role of the word "lap" as noun and verb tends to get confusing, so
    let's coin some other words to define situations where one runner
    overtakes another on the track. When this occurs anywhere on the track, I
    shall term it a "crossing." When it happens at the start line, as in
    the second problem, I can't resist borrowing the colorful Greek word
    "syzygy", a technical term from Astronomy for the situation where
    3 or more moons or planets line up.

    To discuss the problems, let c = the distance per lap in the inner lane
    (for example, c = 400m is common for the innermost lane,) and let d denote
    the additional distance per lap in the outer lane. Then the inside runner
    will lap the outside runner on his lap number x (which need not be an integer,)
    provided dx = c, making the distance run cx, or c^2/d. (c^2 = "c squared", or
    c times c.)

    Simple as it is, this reasoning overlooks one minor subtlety having to do
    with the shape of most tracks. The reasoning is correct for exactly
    circular tracks, but most tracks have semicircular curves joined by 100m
    straightaways. Let's imagine the overtaking runner is 5 meters behind at
    the beginning of the final lap before crossing. Then d > 5, and if the
    track is circular the gap will be made up at constant rate, so the crossing
    will occur 5/d fraction of the way through the last lap. But if 100m
    straightaways are present, and if d > 10, then a gap of d/2 - 5 will remain
    at the end of the first curve, and no further reduction will occur
    until 100m later at the start of the second curve.

    Taking these observations into account, a correct result for such tracks is
    c^2/d - 200{c/d} if {c/d} <= 1/2 (where {} denotes fractional part,) and
    c^2/d -200{c/d} + 100 in the contrary case.

    Using some common measurements for outdoor tracks (c = 400m, lanes 1.07 meters
    wide,) runners in lanes 1 and 5 will cross at distance 5,874.86m, or 14 laps
    plus another 274.86 meters.

    It might make an interesting pacing workout for runners of equal ability
    to test these numbers on the track. Start at the beginning of a straightaway
    in order to match paces and then attempt to continue on at exactly the same
    pace until you cross again.

    I don't recommend a workout similarly based on the second problem. Here's why:

    Syzygy occurs when the runners cross, having each gone an exact integer
    number of laps, n and m, say. This requires that nc = m(c+d) for natural
    numbers n and m, which can only happen when d/c is a rational
    number. Unfortunately, assuming exact measurements and standard tracks, d/c
    is normally a rational multiple of pi, and therefore irrational. Exact syzygy
    will NEVER occur!

    If we only require that a crossing take place within e meters of the start
    (think: e small,) then we enter a subfield of number theory called
    Diophantine approximation. (After Diophantus of Alexandria, a 3rd century
    mathematician.) With x = d/c, the issue boils down to
    approximating x to within e/c amount of error using a fraction of minimum
    denominator, i.e., to find natural numbers m and n so that

    | m/n - x | < e/(nc),

    with n as small as possible. See, e.g., chapter 11 of Hardy and Wright, The
    Theory of Numbers, Oxford University Press, London, 1938, for more information
    on such problems.

    --
    ************************************************************************
    Terry R. McConnell Mathematics/215 Carnegie/Syracuse, N.Y. 13244-1150
    [email hidden] 229B Physics Bldg http://barnyard.syr.edu/~tmc
    ************************************************************************

  2. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Terry R. McConnell) said:

    Math is everywhere one chooses to look for it: As a mathematician and

    mathematics teacher, I take that phrase very much to heart. I am happy

    whenever I encounter new mathematical issues, particularly when they arise

    in the world beyond mathematics and the sciences, and I take pleasure in

    sharing these observations with others. It is especially gratifying when

    mathematical ideas that I have talked about in class crop up in connection

    with running.

    <snip>

    Okay, somebody is a complete geek.

    And I think it's me, because I've pondered some of these issues while on
    the track myself, although certainly not in this detail.

    Have you figured out the number of laps required for syzygy if e is,
    say, 0.5 m?

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  3. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Terry R. McConnell) said:

    Math is everywhere one chooses to look for it: As a mathematician and

    mathematics teacher, I take that phrase very much to heart. I am happy

    whenever I encounter new mathematical issues, particularly when they arise

    in the world beyond mathematics and the sciences, and I take pleasure in

    sharing these observations with others. It is especially gratifying when

    mathematical ideas that I have talked about in class crop up in connection

    with running.

    <snip>

    Okay, somebody is a complete geek.

    And I think it's me, because I've pondered some of these issues while on
    the track myself, although certainly not in this detail.

    Have you figured out the number of laps required for syzygy if e is,
    say, 0.5 m?

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  4. "Terry R. McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    Math is everywhere one chooses to look for it: As a mathematician and
    mathematics teacher, I take that phrase very much to heart. I am happy
    whenever I encounter new mathematical issues, particularly when they arise
    in the world beyond mathematics and the sciences, and I take pleasure in
    sharing these observations with others. It is especially gratifying when
    mathematical ideas that I have talked about in class crop up in connection
    with running.

    It didn't concern running, but the summer I took Combinatorics, & we'd been
    talking about Ramsey's Theorem, Ann Landers printed a letter on the subject
    (about how silly it was that people spent time & money trying to find Ramsey
    Numbers, etc.). That was also the same summer that Fermat got proved & even
    made the regular newspapers.

    Math gets little respect (people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --
    it's almost a badge of honor-- but they are if they can't read....go figure
    🙂) but just try doing without it!
    bj

  5. "Terry R. McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    What the hell are you doing here? I thought you'd been cashiered from
    rec.running for being both honest and interesting.

  6. In article <7qsod.1858$TG2.1163@trnddc01>,

    bj said:

    It didn't concern running, but the summer I took Combinatorics, & we'd been
    talking about Ramsey's Theorem, Ann Landers printed a letter on the subject
    (about how silly it was that people spent time & money trying to find Ramsey
    Numbers, etc.).

    Ignorant people say all kinds of things. They don't understand that if
    people didn't do all of this weird math stuff, they wouldn't have half
    of their modern conveniences. It's always amazing to me how someone will
    do some math research that pretty much everyone is sure is completely
    abstract, with no applications to the "real world," and then 100 years
    later some physicist will run into a problem and find out that that
    "abstract" math is just what he needs to solve the problem!

    It always amazes me that people who don't know much math think college
    math must just be about learning to multiply bigger numbers together.

    Quoted message said:


    Math gets little respect (people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --
    it's almost a badge of honor-- but they are if they can't read....go figure
    🙂) but just try doing without it!

    I've said this for years: if you tell people you aren't good at math,
    they say, "Oh, that's okay, neither am I." But if you tell people you
    can't read, they say "What the hell is wrong with you?! You need to take
    some remedial courses or something! You can't go through life without
    being able to read!"

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  7. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Harold Buck said:


    Okay, somebody is a complete geek.

    And I think it's me, because I've pondered some of these issues while on
    the track myself, although certainly not in this detail.

    Welcome to the club.

    Quoted message said:


    Have you figured out the number of laps required for syzygy if e is,
    say, 0.5 m?

    No, but I know how I'd start. The quickest way would just be a brute
    force computer trial of all possible fractions, increasing the denominator
    until success. A more theoretical approach would start from a continued
    fraction expansion of pi.

    --
    ************************************************************************
    Terry R. McConnell Mathematics/215 Carnegie/Syracuse, N.Y. 13244-1150
    [email hidden] 229B Physics Bldg http://barnyard.syr.edu/~tmc
    ************************************************************************

  8. In article <7qsod.1858$TG2.1163@trnddc01>,

    bj said:


    "Terry R. McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    It didn't concern running, but the summer I took Combinatorics, & we'd been
    talking about Ramsey's Theorem, Ann Landers printed a letter on the subject
    (about how silly it was that people spent time & money trying to find Ramsey
    Numbers, etc.). That was also the same summer that Fermat got proved & even
    made the regular newspapers.

    People spend much more time and money trying to climb Mt. Everest. Perhaps
    the motivations are, at base, not that different.

    --
    ************************************************************************
    Terry R. McConnell Mathematics/215 Carnegie/Syracuse, N.Y. 13244-1150
    [email hidden] 229B Physics Bldg http://barnyard.syr.edu/~tmc
    ************************************************************************

  9. "Terry R. McConnell" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    No, but I know how I'd start. The quickest way would just be a brute
    force computer trial of all possible fractions, increasing the
    denominator
    until success. A more theoretical approach would start from a
    continued
    fraction expansion of pi.

    Please no more! I'm want to remember math as 6*5 and pi as apple crumb
    or mulberry. 😉

    -DF

  10. Harold Buck said:

    It's always amazing to me how someone will
    do some math research that pretty much everyone is sure is completely
    abstract, with no applications to the "real world," and then 100 years
    later some physicist will run into a problem and find out that that
    "abstract" math is just what he needs to solve the problem!

    Sometimes it happens backwards and the physicist helps the numerical
    analyst 😉
    From "Prime Obsession" by John Derbyshire

    "Hugh Montgomery's most recent work had been an investigation of the
    spacing between non-trivial zeros of the zeta function....Here is the
    story as he tells it.

    ~I was still a graduate student when I did this work. I had written my
    thesis but not yet defended it. When I first did the work, I didn't
    understand what it meant. I felt that there should be something this was
    telling me, but I didn't know what, and I was troubled by that.

    That spring, the spring of '72, Harold Diamond organized an analytic
    number theory conference in St. Louis. I went and lectured at that, then
    I flew to Ann Arbor. I'd accepted a job at Ann Arbor and I wanted to buy
    a house. Well, I bought a house. Then I stopped off in Princeton on my
    way back to England, specifically to talk to Atle [Selberg] about this.
    I was a little worried that when I showed him my results he'd say: "This
    is all very nice Hugh, but I proved it years ago." I heaved a big sigh
    of relief when he didn't say that. He seemed interested but rather noncommittal.

    I took afternoon tea that day in Fuld Hall with Chowla. Freeman Dyson
    was standing across the room. I had spent the previous year at the
    Institute and I knew him perfectly well by sight, but I had never spoken
    to him. Chowla said: "Have you met Dyson?" I said no, I hadn't. He said:
    "I'll introduce you." I said no, I didn't feel I had to meet Dyson.
    Chowla insisted, and so I was dragged reluctantly across the room to
    meet Dyson. He was very polite, and asked me what I was working on. I
    told him I was working on the differences between the non-trivial zeros
    of Riemann's zeta function, and that I had developed a conjecture that
    the distribution function for those differences had integrand
    1-[sin(pi)(u)/(pi)(u)]^2. He got very excited. He said:"That's the form
    factor for the pair correlation of eigenvalues of random Hermitian Matrices!"

    I'd never heard of the term "pair correlation". It really made the
    connection. The next day Atle had a note Dyson had written to me giving
    references to Mehta's book, places I should look, and so on. To this day
    I've had one conversation with Dyson and one letter from him. It was
    very fruitful.~

    You can understand why Freeman Dyson was so excited. The expression that
    Hugh Montgomery mentioned, the expression that had emerged from his
    inquiries into the Riemann zeta function's non-trivial zeros, was
    precisely the form factor associated with a random Hermitian matrix- the
    kind of thing Dyson had been had been involved with for several years in
    his researches into quantum dynamical systems."

    Quoted message said:

    I've said this for years: if you tell people you aren't good at math,
    they say, "Oh, that's okay, neither am I." But if you tell people you
    can't read, they say "What the hell is wrong with you?! You need to take
    some remedial courses or something! You can't go through life without
    being able to read!"

    I see your point, but on the other hand, I'm not good at math, despite
    many classes. What's the point of denying reality?

    -J
    "It is strange that we know so little about the properties of numbers.
    They are our handiwork, yet they baffle us; we can fathom only a few of
    their intricacies. Having defined their attributes and prescribed their
    behaviour, we are hard pressed to perceive the implications of our
    formulas. "
    James R. Newman

  11. In article <[email hidden]>,

    jogger said:
    Quoted message said:

    I've said this for years: if you tell people you aren't good at math,
    they say, "Oh, that's okay, neither am I." But if you tell people you
    can't read, they say "What the hell is wrong with you?! You need to take
    some remedial courses or something! You can't go through life without
    being able to read!"

    I see your point, but on the other hand, I'm not good at math, despite
    many classes. What's the point of denying reality?

    Well, the problem is that people take not being *good* at it as a free
    pass to not think about it *at all*. Even if you aren't good at it, you
    should know something about it and be able to use it for things in your
    life. Otherwise, you end up buying 15 razor blades for $13.99 because
    you assume the larger size will be a better deal, passing on the package
    of 5 razor blades for $2.99.

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  12. bjones said:

    people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --

    No, they become White House economists.

    Lyndon
    "Speed Kills...It kills those that don't have it!" --US Olympic Track Coach
    Brooks Johnson

  13. Harold Buck said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    jogger said:
    Quoted message said:

    I've said this for years: if you tell people you aren't good at math,
    they say, "Oh, that's okay, neither am I."

    I'm also amazed at the number of biologists (and probably others, but I
    run into more biologists) that don't understand basic problem solving
    processes. However, this has been improving in recent years as biology
    and ecology now depend more heavily on statistics than they used to. The
    people that can't do math at all are retiring or working in other
    sectors (unfortunately where they can inflict serious damage on the
    general public) - at least up here.

    But if you tell people you

    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    can't read, they say "What the hell is wrong with you?! You need to take
    some remedial courses or something! You can't go through life without
    being able to read!"

    I see your point, but on the other hand, I'm not good at math, despite
    many classes. What's the point of denying reality?

    Well, the problem is that people take not being *good* at it as a free
    pass to not think about it *at all*.

    Shucks, with pictographs on the cash register keys at McD's and bar
    codes in the grocery store and plastic to pay with, hmmm.... 😉
    (note the smiley, I really am being very facetious)

    Even if you aren't good at it, you

    Quoted message said:

    should know something about it and be able to use it for things in your
    life. Otherwise, you end up buying 15 razor blades for $13.99 because
    you assume the larger size will be a better deal, passing on the package
    of 5 razor blades for $2.99.

    Agreed. I swear our grocery was testing this for several weeks in a row
    with sales like 7 for $3.92, where the arithmetic wasn't quite as easy
    as 8 for $4.00. I'm not sure if some of the differences I'm seeing today
    are a result of time, space, or discipline since I was in school (moved
    from east coast to Colorado in 1975 and changed from math to ecology at
    same time). It seems like many people today wouldn't have gotten out of
    8th grade when I was in school.

    Dot
    yes, I have 5 small boxes of whatever instead of the 1 large box.

    --
    "The eagle, who believed he was a chicken, wasn't. However, until he
    discovered what he was, he was limited to live as one."
    -Unknown but quoted from Lisa Butler on ultra list

  14. In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Lyndon) said:
    bjones said:

    people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --

    No, they become White House economists.

    The primary requirement for that job is to be "optimistic." If you
    aren't, you get fired and replaced with someone who is.

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  15. "Harold Buck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Lyndon) said:
    bjones said:

    people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --

    No, they become White House economists.

    The primary requirement for that job is to be "optimistic." If you
    aren't, you get fired and replaced with someone who is.

    If Condi 's optimism is wearing a pleted skirt with pom poms on her
    shoes saying yes, God, to Dubya is optimism, I guess you're correct. I
    tend to think it's "blind" obedience - follow the Pied Piper.

  16. "Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:


    "Harold Buck" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    news:[email hidden]...

    Quoted message said:

    In article <[email hidden]>,

    (Lyndon) said:

    bjones wrote:

    >people aren't ashamed that they can't do math --

    No, they become White House economists.

    The primary requirement for that job is to be "optimistic." If you
    aren't, you get fired and replaced with someone who is.

    If Condi 's optimism is wearing a pleted skirt with pom poms on her
    shoes saying yes, God, to Dubya is optimism, I guess you're correct. I
    tend to think it's "blind" obedience - follow the Pied Piper.

    Now I thought after the election, all the whining from the blue states would
    stop (at least until '08). Now you know that the majority of the country
    disagrees with you so just get on with your life.

    Quoted message said:


  17. Quoted message said:

    Now I thought after the election, all the whining from the blue states would
    stop (at least until '08).

    Not on your life pal! Not on your life.

  18. Quoted message said:

    "Krishna" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

    Quoted message said:

    "Doug Freese" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
    If Condi 's optimism is wearing a pleted skirt with pom poms on her
    shoes saying yes, God, to Dubya is optimism, I guess you're correct. I
    tend to think it's "blind" obedience - follow the Pied Piper.

    Now I thought after the election, all the whining from the blue states
    would
    stop (at least until '08). Now you know that the majority of the country
    disagrees with you

    Not the rest of this planet.

    cheers,
    --
    David (in Hamilton ON)
    www.absolutelyaccurate.com
    www.allfalldown.org

  19. In article <[email hidden]>,

    Krishna said:


    Now I thought after the election, all the whining from the blue states would
    stop (at least until '08). Now you know that the majority of the country
    disagrees with you so just get on with your life.

    The majority of the country still believes that we attacked Iraq because
    of their role in 9/11. What does that tell you about the majority of the
    country?

    --Harold Buck

    "I used to rock and roll all night,
    and party every day.
    Then it was every other day. . . ."
    -Homer J. Simpson

  20. Harold Buck said:
    Quoted message said:
    Quoted message said:

    I've said this for years: if you tell people you aren't good at math,
    they say, "Oh, that's okay, neither am I." But if you tell people you
    can't read, they say "What the hell is wrong with you?! You need to take
    some remedial courses or something! You can't go through life without
    being able to read!"

    Quoted message said:

    Well, the problem is that people take not being *good* at it as a free
    pass to not think about it *at all*. Even if you aren't good at it, you
    should know something about it and be able to use it for things in your
    life. Otherwise, you end up buying 15 razor blades for $13.99 because
    you assume the larger size will be a better deal, passing on the package
    of 5 razor blades for $2.99.

    Again, I take your point and agree. Look at your original quote, and you
    might see why I got hung up on it. You're equating someone admitting to
    not being good at math to being the same as someone saying they can't read.

    To be equivalent statements, someone would need to be saying they can't
    add numbers together or something on the same basic skill level. Then
    others would need to reply, "That's okay, I don't know how to do that
    either." If this is what you see happening in real life, then it is a
    shame.

    There are other interpretations of "I'm not good at math", which are
    also nothing to be proud of, but not the same level of deficiency as not
    being able to read.

    Yours in Nitpickiness,
    -J

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.