%%%% THIS FILE IS AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED %%%% DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE DIRECTLY, %%%% ONLY EDIT THE SOURCE, tom-5/document.tex. %%%% %% Standard package list \documentclass[letterpaper]{article} \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \usepackage[english]{babel} \usepackage[top=3cm, bottom=3cm, left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm]{geometry} \usepackage[onehalfspacing]{setspace} \usepackage{amsmath,amssymb,amsthm,wasysym} \usepackage{nicefrac,booktabs} \usepackage{mathptmx} \usepackage{cite} \usepackage[colorlinks=true]{hyperref} %% Various helpers for Tom's papers \newcommand{\gs}{\textnormal{gs}} \newcommand{\ord}{\textnormal{ord}} \newcommand{\Exp}{\textnormal{Exp}} \newcommand{\Log}{\textnormal{Log}} \newcommand{\lcm}{\textnormal{lcm}} \newcommand{\range}{\textnormal{range}} \newcommand{\NR}{\textnormal{NR}} \newcommand{\Mod}[1]{\left(\textnormal{mod}~#1\right)} \newcommand{\ap}[2]{\left\langle #1;#2 \right\rangle} \newcommand{\summ}[1]{\sum_{k=1}^m{#1}} \newcommand{\bt}[1]{{{#1}\mathbb{N}}} \newcommand{\fp}[1]{{\left\lbrace{#1}\right\rbrace}} \newcommand{\intv}[1]{{\left[1,{#1}\right]}} %% Lifted from http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2767389/referencing-a-theorem-like-environment-by-its-name %% This lets me do things like "Theorem A" and have the references work properly. \makeatletter \let\@old@begintheorem=\@begintheorem \def\@begintheorem#1#2[#3]{% \gdef\@thm@name{#3}% \@old@begintheorem{#1}{#2}[#3]% } \def\namedthmlabel#1{\begingroup \edef\@currentlabel{\@thm@name}% \label{#1}\endgroup } \makeatother % end lift \newtheoremstyle{namedthrm} {}{}{}{}{}{}{ } % This last space needs to be there {\bf\thmname{#1} \thmnote{#3}.} %% End reference hack %% Document start \date{} \begin{document} %% Content start \newtheorem{thrm}{Theorem} \newtheorem{lmma}{Lemma} \newtheorem{corl}{Corollary} \newtheorem{defn}{Definition} \title{A partition of the non-negative integers, with applications to Ramsey Theory} \author{Tom C. Brown\\ \\ Department of Mathematics, ¶¡ÏãÔ°AV\\ Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6\\ \texttt{tbrown@sfu.ca}} \maketitle \begin{center}{\small {\bf Citation data:} T.C. {Brown}, \emph{A partition of the non-negative integers, with applications to Ramsey theory}, Discrete Mathematics and its Applications (Proceedings of the International Conference on Discrete Mathematics and its Applications, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Ettimadai Coimbatore, India), Narosa Publishing House, 2006, pp.~79--87.}\bigskip\end{center} \begin{abstract}After some general remarks about Ramsey theory, we describe a particular partition of the non-negative integers into infinitely many translates of an infinite set. This partition is used to settle (negatively) the question of the truth of a statement similar in form to the Erd\H{o}s-Graham canonical version of van der Waerden's theorem on arithmetic progressions. It is also used to give a lower bound for one of the classical van der Waerden functions. \end{abstract} \section{Introduction} Ramsey theory is a cohesive sub-discipline of combinatorics. The theme of Ramsey theory is that ``complete chaos is impossible''. Or, one could say that Ramsey theory is ``the study of unavoidable regularities in large structures''. Two of the largest branches of Ramsey theory start with either ``Ramsey's Theorem'' on the one hand, or ``van der Waerden's Theorem on Arithmetic Progressions'' on the other. These two branches sometimes overlap, but a great number of results can be placed on one branch or the other. The simplest form of Ramsey's Theorem says that for every positive integer $k$ there exists a (smallest) positive integer $r(k)$ such that any graph on $r(k)$ vertices contains either a complete subgraph on $k$ vertices (all edges are present) or an independent set of $k$ vertices (no edge is present). A stronger statement, also proved by Ramsey, is that in any graph on infinitely many vertices, there is either an infinite set of vertices $A$, in which all edges are present, or there is an infinite set of vertices $B$, in which no edge is present. The simplest form of van der Waerden's Theorem on Arithmetic Progressions says that for every positive integer $k$ there exists a (smallest) positive integer $w(k)$ such that if $\{1,2,\ldots,w(k)\}$ is partitioned into two parts, in any way whatsoever, then at least one of the parts contains a $k$-term arithmetic progression, that is, a subset of the form $\{a,a+d,a+2d,\ldots,a+(k-1)d\}$. (An equivalent statement is the following: If the set of all positive integers is partitioned into two parts, then one part must contain arbitrarily large (finite) arithmetic progressions.) For example, $w(5) = 178$, and this means: \begin{enumerate} \item If $\{1,2,3,\ldots,178\}$ is the disjoint union of $A$ and $B$, then $A$ or $B$ must contain a 5-term arithmetic progression $\{a,a+d,a+2d,a+3d,a+4d\}$. \item There exists a partition of $\{1,2,3,\ldots,177\}$ into sets $A$ and $B$ such that neither $A$ nor $B$ contains a 5-term arithmetic progression. \end{enumerate} The fact that $w(5) = 178$ was shown by direct computation. To establish $w(5) \leq 178$, one has to essentially check all of the $2^{178}$ partitions into two parts of $\{1,2,3,\ldots,178\}$, so its not surprising that the value of $w(6)$ is unknown. (It is known that $w(6)\geq 696$.) Other known values of $w(k)$ are $w(3) = 9$, $w(4) = 35$, $w(3,3,3) = 27$ (partitions of $\{1,2,\ldots,27\}$ into 3 parts), and $w(3,3,3,3) = 76$ (partitions of $\{1,2,\ldots,76\}$ into 4 parts). There are also a few known values such as $w(4,3,3) = 51$, which means that every partition of $\{1,2,\ldots,51\}$ into 3 parts produces a 4-term arithmetic progression in the first part, or a 3-term arithmetic progression in the 2nd or 3rd parts, and 51 is the smallest positive integer with this property. In 1999, Ron Graham gave Timothy Gowers a ``reward'' of \$1000 US dollars for showing that $w(k) < 2^{2^{2^{2^{2^{k+9}}}}}$. This bound, while quite large, is tiny compared to the previous best-known bounds. The true rate of growth of the function $w(k)$ is one of the holy grails of Ramsey theory, and Ron Graham now offers \$1000 US dollars for a proof (or disproof) that $w(k) \leq 2^{k^2}$. The best lower bound known for $w(k)$ is the following: for every $\epsilon > 0$, $2^k/k^\epsilon < w(k)$, for all sufficiently large $k$. \section{The Description of a Particular Partition} Let $S$ denote the set of all distinct sums of odd powers of 2, including 0 as the empty sum, and let $T$ denote the set of all distinct sums of even powers of 2, including 0 as the empty sum. Then every non-negative integer can be written uniquely in the form $s+t$, where $s\in S$ and $t\in T$. Thus $\{s+T:s\in S\}$ is a partition of $\omega=\{0,1,2,\ldots\}$ into translates of $T$. It is more convenient to describe this partition as a \emph{coloring} $f$ of $\omega$. Thus for each $n\in\omega$, we write $n = s + t$, $s\in S$, $t\in T$, and define $f(n) = s$. In other words, if $n = \sum_{i\text{ odd}}2^i + \sum_{i\text{ even}} 2^i$, then $f(n) = \sum_{i\text{ odd}} 2^i$. For this coloring $f$, the set of colors is $S$, and for each $s\in S$, $f$ is constant on the ``color class'' $s + T$. \section{A van der Waerden-Like Theorem} We need the following definition. \begin{defn} If $A = \{a_1 1$, the \emph{gap size} of $A$ is $\gs(A) = \max\{a_{j+1}-a_j:1\leq j\leq n-1\}$. If $|A| = 1$, $\gs(A) = 1$.\end{defn} \begin{thrm} If $\omega$ is finitely colored, there exists a fixed $d\geq1$ ($d$ depends only on the coloring) and arbitrarily large (finite) monochromatic sets $A$ with $\gs(A) = d$.\label{t1}\end{thrm} This fact first appeared in \cite{brown1968}. A proof can be found in \cite{landman+robertson2004}. Various applications appear in \cite{brown1971-1, deluca+varricchio1998,lallement1979,straubing1982}. Theorem \ref{t1} is somewhat similar in form to van der Waerden's theorem on arithmetic progressions \cite{vanderwaerden1927}. However, Theorem \ref{t1} differs in a number of ways. Van der Waerden's theorem does not imply Theorem \ref{t1}, since the $d$ in the conclusion of Theorem \ref{t1} is independent of the size of the monochromatic sets $A$. Beck \cite{beck1980} showed the existence of a 2-coloring of $\omega$ such that if $A$ is any monochromatic arithmetic progression with common difference $d$, then $|A|<2\log d$. Hence the presence of large monochromatic arithmetic progressions, which is guaranteed by van der Waerden's theorem, is not enough to imply Theorem \ref{t1}. Somewhat earlier, Justin \cite{justin1971} found an explicit coloring such that if $A$ is any monochromatic arithmetic progression with common difference $d$, then $|A|0$ it holds since then each power of 2 which occurs in $j$ is less that each power of 2 which occurs in $p4^k$. Thus the blocks $[p4^k, p4^k+4^k-1]$ and $[q4^k+4^k-1]$ are colored identically if $f(p) = f(q)$, and have no color in common if $f(p)\neq f(q)$. Proceeding with the lower bound in Theorem \ref{t2}, we note that for $k\geq1$, the colors of any aligned block of size $4^k$ have the form $UUVV$, where $U$ and $V$ are blocks of size $4^{k-1}$. Next, we note that any block of size $4^k$, aligned or not, contains \emph{at least} $2^k$ colors. For let $A$ be any block of size $4^k$. Let the first element of $A$ lie in the aligned block $S$ of size $4^k$, and let $T$ be the aligned block of size $4^k$ which immediately succeeds $S$. If $S$ and $T$ are colored identically, then the elements of $f(A)$ are just a cyclic permutation of the elements of $f(S)$, and hence the block $A$ contains exactly $2^k$ colors. By Lemma \ref{l1}, the remaining case is when $S$, $T$ have no color in common. In this case, by the preceding paragraph, $f(S)f(T) = UUVVXXYY$, where no two of $U,V,X,Y$ have a color in common, and $U,V,X,Y$ are of size $4^{k-1}$. Then $f(A)$, which has size $4^k$, contains either $UV$ or $VX$ or $XY$, and so has at least $2^{k-1} + 2^{k-1} = 2^k$ colors. Finally, we note that for $s\geq1$, $k\geq1$, every set of $4^s$ consecutive aligned blocks of size $4^k$ contains at least $2^s$ blocks of size $4^k$, no two of which have a common color. This follows from the fact that these $4^s$ blocks have the form $[p4^k, p4^k+4^k-1]$, $t\leq p\leq t + 4^s - 1$, for some $t$. The block $f([t,t+4^s-1])$ has at least $2^s$ colors, by the preceding paragraph. If $f(p)\neq f(q)$, where $t\leq p 2^{2k}$. For a general $m$, choose $k$ so that $2^k\leq m<2^{k+1}$. Then $w(3;m)\geq w(3;2^k)>2^{2k}>\frac14m^2$.\end{proof} \section{Remarks} \begin{enumerate} \item The lower bound in Theorem \ref{t3} is not the best possible. Indeed, in the standard reference Ramsey Theory \cite{graham+rothschild+spencer1990}, the authors show with more elaborate techniques that for some positive constant $c$, $w(3;m)>m^{c\log m}$. \item Corollary \ref{c1} shows that a constant/1-1 canonical version of Theorem \ref{t1} is not true. We also know by the Bergelson/Hindman/McCutcheon example that a density version of Theorem \ref{t1} is not true. The following three simple examples, most involving only 3-element sets, illustrate various combinations of the truth or falsity of the ``constant/1-1 version'' and the ``density version''. \begin{enumerate} \item The simplest non-trivial case of van der Waerden's theorem says that every finite coloring of the positive integers produces a monochromatic 3-term arithmetic progression. The constant/1-1 version of the result holds by the Erd\H{o}s-Graham theorem, and the density version holds by Szemer\'edi's theorem. \item Schur's theorem says that if the positive integers are finitely colored, then there is a monochromatic solution of $x+y=z$. The density version does not hold by taking all the odd integers. The constant/1-1 version does not hold by coloring each $x$ with the highest power of 2 dividing $x$. \item Kevin O'Bryant showed me this example: If the positive integers are finitely colored, then there is a monochromatic 3-term geometric progression (a set of the form $\{a,ad,ad^2\}$). To get the constant/1-1 version, let a coloring $g$ of the positive integers be given. Define a new coloring $h$ by setting $h(x) = g(2^x)$. Then, by the Erd\H{o}s-Graham theorem, there is a set $\{a,a+d,a+2d\}$ on which the coloring $h$ is either constant or 1-1, so the coloring $g$ is either constant or 1-1 on the set $\{2^a,2^a2^d,2^a(2^d)^2\}$. The density version does not hold, since the set of square-free numbers has positive density. \item It seems natural to ask for a collection $P$ of 3-element sets (if such a collection exists!) for which: \begin{enumerate} \item Every set of positive integers with positive upper density contains an element of $P$. \item It's not the case that for every coloring of the positive integers, there is an element of $P$ on which the coloring is either constant or 1-1. Allen R. Freedman communicated the following example to me, involving infinite sets. Here instead of considering those collections of triples $\{x,y,z\}$ for which $x+z=2y$, or $x+y=z$, or $xz = y^2$, one considers the collection $P$ of all subsets of $\omega$ which have positive density. Then trivially every set of positive density contains an element of $P$. However, any coloring which is constant on each interval $[2^{n-1},2^n]$, with different colors for different $n$, shows that the constant/1-1 version does not hold. \end{enumerate} \end{enumerate} \item We have used a particular partition of $\omega$ into infinitely many translates of an infinite set. Perhaps it's possible to describe \emph{all} partitions of $\omega$ into infinitely many translates of an infinite set. \end{enumerate} \bibliographystyle{amsplain} \bibliography{tom-all} \end{document}