Pigeon hole principle: Prove that any set of six positive integers whose sum is 13 must contain at least one...











up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1













Prove that any set of six positive integers whose sum is 13 must contain at least one subset whose sum is three.




My work. I am trying by using the Pigeon hole principle. I have proved that at least two non-empty disjoint subsets have the same sum but can't go any further.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138 yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • Can you show your work? You will get better help.
    – tarit goswami
    2 days ago










  • The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago








  • 1




    There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
    – David Hartley
    2 days ago










  • Please consider identical elements.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago















up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1













Prove that any set of six positive integers whose sum is 13 must contain at least one subset whose sum is three.




My work. I am trying by using the Pigeon hole principle. I have proved that at least two non-empty disjoint subsets have the same sum but can't go any further.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











put on hold as off-topic by Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138 yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.













  • Can you show your work? You will get better help.
    – tarit goswami
    2 days ago










  • The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago








  • 1




    There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
    – David Hartley
    2 days ago










  • Please consider identical elements.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago













up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
1
down vote

favorite
1






1






Prove that any set of six positive integers whose sum is 13 must contain at least one subset whose sum is three.




My work. I am trying by using the Pigeon hole principle. I have proved that at least two non-empty disjoint subsets have the same sum but can't go any further.










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












Prove that any set of six positive integers whose sum is 13 must contain at least one subset whose sum is three.




My work. I am trying by using the Pigeon hole principle. I have proved that at least two non-empty disjoint subsets have the same sum but can't go any further.







discrete-mathematics pigeonhole-principle






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









Robert Z

90.6k1057128




90.6k1057128






New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 days ago









Divyansh Hardia

121




121




New contributor




Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Divyansh Hardia is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




put on hold as off-topic by Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138 yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.




put on hold as off-topic by Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138 yesterday


This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:


  • "This question is missing context or other details: Please improve the question by providing additional context, which ideally includes your thoughts on the problem and any attempts you have made to solve it. This information helps others identify where you have difficulties and helps them write answers appropriate to your experience level." – Shaun, amWhy, Paul Frost, user302797, user10354138

If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.












  • Can you show your work? You will get better help.
    – tarit goswami
    2 days ago










  • The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago








  • 1




    There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
    – David Hartley
    2 days ago










  • Please consider identical elements.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago


















  • Can you show your work? You will get better help.
    – tarit goswami
    2 days ago










  • The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago








  • 1




    There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
    – David Hartley
    2 days ago










  • Please consider identical elements.
    – Divyansh Hardia
    2 days ago
















Can you show your work? You will get better help.
– tarit goswami
2 days ago




Can you show your work? You will get better help.
– tarit goswami
2 days ago












The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
– Divyansh Hardia
2 days ago






The question specifically asks for the use of Pigeon hole principle. Since each of the six numbers is not distinct, and a subset need not be of consecutive numbers, I couldn't really apply the principle. So far, I have established that there are 63 non-empty subsets, the sum of each of which lies between 1 and 13. Therefore, at least 5 subsets have the same sum. Removing the common elements from any two, we can get a pair of disjoint sets. But the problem is still not solved.
– Divyansh Hardia
2 days ago






1




1




There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
– David Hartley
2 days ago




There are no sets of positive integers with six members whose sum is 13. (The elements of a set are distinct by definition.)
– David Hartley
2 days ago












Please consider identical elements.
– Divyansh Hardia
2 days ago




Please consider identical elements.
– Divyansh Hardia
2 days ago










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote













Hint. Let $1leq a_1leq a_2leq a_3leq a_4leq a_5leq a_6$. We know that $sum_{k=1}^n a_k=13$.



Now consider the following cases:



1) If $a_4geq 4$ then $$10=13-1-1-1geq 13-a_1-a_2-a_3\=a_4+a_5+a_6geq 4cdot 3=12$$
which is a contradiction.



2) If $a_4=3$ then ...



3) If $a_4leq 2$ then ...



I don't think that the Pigeonhole principle is strictly necessary here.






share|cite|improve this answer























  • I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
    – F.Carette
    2 days ago










  • @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
    – Robert Z
    2 days ago










  • A bit quicker indeed! +1
    – F.Carette
    2 days ago


















up vote
2
down vote













(Not pigeonhole)The numbers in the set $S$ cannot all be distinct, because you will get more than 13 as sum otherwise. So there has to have repeat. The only way to get 3 is $1+2$, $1+1+1$ or $3$. so It suffices to show $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Suppose not,



case 1: $S$ contains no 3 and less than three 1 and no 2. Then $S$ contains at most two 1 and the rest are at least 4 which is not possible.



case 2: $S$ contains no 3 and no 1. It is not possible again.



So $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Then you can get a subset whose sum is 3?






share|cite|improve this answer




























    up vote
    1
    down vote













    Clearly, some of the elements in the set must be below $4$. (Otherwise, the sum would be at least $4 cdot 6 =24$.)



    Now we argue by contradiction. Suppose no subset has sum $3$. Then in particular, $3$ cannot occur in the set, and either $1$ or $2$ may not occur.



    Suppose $1$ does not occur. If all elements equal $2$, the sum is $12$ instead of $13$. If at least one element is at least $4$, then the sum is at least $2+2+2+2+2+4=14$, contradiction.



    Suppose $2$ does not occur. Note that there can be at most two $1$'s. So the total sum is at least $1+1+4+4+4+4=18$, contradiction.



    As each case leads to a contradiction, we conclude that our initial assumption that no subset has sum $3$ must be false.






    share|cite|improve this answer




























      up vote
      0
      down vote













      The set cannot contain the number 3.



      Now consider how many of the numbers can be $ge 4$. Clearly there can not be more than three of them, or the sum would be $ge 13$. There can not be three either, because the sum of the other three numbers would be $ge 3$ and the sum of all 6 would be $ge 15$.



      So there are at most 2 numbers $ge 4$, i.e. there are at least 4 numbers $le 2$.



      If any of those four numbers is $1$, there is a subset ${1,2}$ or ${1,1,1}$ which sums to $3$.



      Therefore, there are at least $4$ numbers equal to $2$, and the other numbers are all $ge 4$.



      But that is impossible, because if all six numbers are equal to $2$ the sum is $12$, and if four or five are equal to 2 the sum is $ge 13$.






      share|cite|improve this answer




























        up vote
        0
        down vote













        Represent the problem in the following manner.



        You have 6 pigeonholes (representing each integer) and 13 pigeons (the total sum). Each hole must have at least one pigeon for the integers to be positive, so you can equivalently consider a problem with 6 pigeonholes and 7 pigeons (with some holes possibly having zero pigeons). Hey, that's kinda familiar...



        By PHP, in the equivalent problem at least one hole must have 2 pigeons. Further, that hole can't have exactly 2 (since that'd represent 3 as a number), so it has to have at least 3.



        The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.



        Hint: is another hole is forced to have an exact number of pigeons now?






        share|cite|improve this answer








        New contributor




        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
        Check out our Code of Conduct.

























          up vote
          0
          down vote













          Note that since the overall sum is odd, you must have at least one odd number in your set (collection) of six. You must also have at least one even number, because the sum of six odd numbers would be even. That cuts down the possibilities quite quickly.



          Suppose there were a contradiction.



          Amongst odd numbers you can't have $3$ and if you have $1$ you can't have $2$ among the even numbers.



          So either your smallest odd number is at least $5$ (and this is the only odd number, since three would take you over total). But then the evens would have to at least $10$ (five twos is the minimum) ...



          Or you have at least one $1$. You can't have three ones, and you can have at most three odd (since only two can be less than $5$ and five odds would have to include three greater than $4$). The lowest total for evens, given there are no $2$s in this case, would be at least three fours = $12$, and you can't fit six in here either.



          So neither case is possible, and there must be a sum of $3$.






          share|cite|improve this answer




























            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes








            6 Answers
            6






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote













            Hint. Let $1leq a_1leq a_2leq a_3leq a_4leq a_5leq a_6$. We know that $sum_{k=1}^n a_k=13$.



            Now consider the following cases:



            1) If $a_4geq 4$ then $$10=13-1-1-1geq 13-a_1-a_2-a_3\=a_4+a_5+a_6geq 4cdot 3=12$$
            which is a contradiction.



            2) If $a_4=3$ then ...



            3) If $a_4leq 2$ then ...



            I don't think that the Pigeonhole principle is strictly necessary here.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago










            • @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
              – Robert Z
              2 days ago










            • A bit quicker indeed! +1
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago















            up vote
            4
            down vote













            Hint. Let $1leq a_1leq a_2leq a_3leq a_4leq a_5leq a_6$. We know that $sum_{k=1}^n a_k=13$.



            Now consider the following cases:



            1) If $a_4geq 4$ then $$10=13-1-1-1geq 13-a_1-a_2-a_3\=a_4+a_5+a_6geq 4cdot 3=12$$
            which is a contradiction.



            2) If $a_4=3$ then ...



            3) If $a_4leq 2$ then ...



            I don't think that the Pigeonhole principle is strictly necessary here.






            share|cite|improve this answer























            • I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago










            • @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
              – Robert Z
              2 days ago










            • A bit quicker indeed! +1
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago













            up vote
            4
            down vote










            up vote
            4
            down vote









            Hint. Let $1leq a_1leq a_2leq a_3leq a_4leq a_5leq a_6$. We know that $sum_{k=1}^n a_k=13$.



            Now consider the following cases:



            1) If $a_4geq 4$ then $$10=13-1-1-1geq 13-a_1-a_2-a_3\=a_4+a_5+a_6geq 4cdot 3=12$$
            which is a contradiction.



            2) If $a_4=3$ then ...



            3) If $a_4leq 2$ then ...



            I don't think that the Pigeonhole principle is strictly necessary here.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            Hint. Let $1leq a_1leq a_2leq a_3leq a_4leq a_5leq a_6$. We know that $sum_{k=1}^n a_k=13$.



            Now consider the following cases:



            1) If $a_4geq 4$ then $$10=13-1-1-1geq 13-a_1-a_2-a_3\=a_4+a_5+a_6geq 4cdot 3=12$$
            which is a contradiction.



            2) If $a_4=3$ then ...



            3) If $a_4leq 2$ then ...



            I don't think that the Pigeonhole principle is strictly necessary here.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 2 days ago

























            answered 2 days ago









            Robert Z

            90.6k1057128




            90.6k1057128












            • I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago










            • @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
              – Robert Z
              2 days ago










            • A bit quicker indeed! +1
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago


















            • I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago










            • @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
              – Robert Z
              2 days ago










            • A bit quicker indeed! +1
              – F.Carette
              2 days ago
















            I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
            – F.Carette
            2 days ago




            I tried to do something similar, but starting with $a_1ge3$ and $a_1lt3$. However, the case ${2,2,2,2,2,3}$ was quite boring to solve. Does assuming properties on $a_3$ rather than $a_1$ help proving it quickly?
            – F.Carette
            2 days ago












            @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
            – Robert Z
            2 days ago




            @F.Carette See my edit. Is it quicker?
            – Robert Z
            2 days ago












            A bit quicker indeed! +1
            – F.Carette
            2 days ago




            A bit quicker indeed! +1
            – F.Carette
            2 days ago










            up vote
            2
            down vote













            (Not pigeonhole)The numbers in the set $S$ cannot all be distinct, because you will get more than 13 as sum otherwise. So there has to have repeat. The only way to get 3 is $1+2$, $1+1+1$ or $3$. so It suffices to show $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Suppose not,



            case 1: $S$ contains no 3 and less than three 1 and no 2. Then $S$ contains at most two 1 and the rest are at least 4 which is not possible.



            case 2: $S$ contains no 3 and no 1. It is not possible again.



            So $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Then you can get a subset whose sum is 3?






            share|cite|improve this answer

























              up vote
              2
              down vote













              (Not pigeonhole)The numbers in the set $S$ cannot all be distinct, because you will get more than 13 as sum otherwise. So there has to have repeat. The only way to get 3 is $1+2$, $1+1+1$ or $3$. so It suffices to show $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Suppose not,



              case 1: $S$ contains no 3 and less than three 1 and no 2. Then $S$ contains at most two 1 and the rest are at least 4 which is not possible.



              case 2: $S$ contains no 3 and no 1. It is not possible again.



              So $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Then you can get a subset whose sum is 3?






              share|cite|improve this answer























                up vote
                2
                down vote










                up vote
                2
                down vote









                (Not pigeonhole)The numbers in the set $S$ cannot all be distinct, because you will get more than 13 as sum otherwise. So there has to have repeat. The only way to get 3 is $1+2$, $1+1+1$ or $3$. so It suffices to show $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Suppose not,



                case 1: $S$ contains no 3 and less than three 1 and no 2. Then $S$ contains at most two 1 and the rest are at least 4 which is not possible.



                case 2: $S$ contains no 3 and no 1. It is not possible again.



                So $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Then you can get a subset whose sum is 3?






                share|cite|improve this answer












                (Not pigeonhole)The numbers in the set $S$ cannot all be distinct, because you will get more than 13 as sum otherwise. So there has to have repeat. The only way to get 3 is $1+2$, $1+1+1$ or $3$. so It suffices to show $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Suppose not,



                case 1: $S$ contains no 3 and less than three 1 and no 2. Then $S$ contains at most two 1 and the rest are at least 4 which is not possible.



                case 2: $S$ contains no 3 and no 1. It is not possible again.



                So $S$ contains at least one 3 or at least three 1's or at least one 1 and one 2. Then you can get a subset whose sum is 3?







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered 2 days ago









                mathnoob

                95713




                95713






















                    up vote
                    1
                    down vote













                    Clearly, some of the elements in the set must be below $4$. (Otherwise, the sum would be at least $4 cdot 6 =24$.)



                    Now we argue by contradiction. Suppose no subset has sum $3$. Then in particular, $3$ cannot occur in the set, and either $1$ or $2$ may not occur.



                    Suppose $1$ does not occur. If all elements equal $2$, the sum is $12$ instead of $13$. If at least one element is at least $4$, then the sum is at least $2+2+2+2+2+4=14$, contradiction.



                    Suppose $2$ does not occur. Note that there can be at most two $1$'s. So the total sum is at least $1+1+4+4+4+4=18$, contradiction.



                    As each case leads to a contradiction, we conclude that our initial assumption that no subset has sum $3$ must be false.






                    share|cite|improve this answer

























                      up vote
                      1
                      down vote













                      Clearly, some of the elements in the set must be below $4$. (Otherwise, the sum would be at least $4 cdot 6 =24$.)



                      Now we argue by contradiction. Suppose no subset has sum $3$. Then in particular, $3$ cannot occur in the set, and either $1$ or $2$ may not occur.



                      Suppose $1$ does not occur. If all elements equal $2$, the sum is $12$ instead of $13$. If at least one element is at least $4$, then the sum is at least $2+2+2+2+2+4=14$, contradiction.



                      Suppose $2$ does not occur. Note that there can be at most two $1$'s. So the total sum is at least $1+1+4+4+4+4=18$, contradiction.



                      As each case leads to a contradiction, we conclude that our initial assumption that no subset has sum $3$ must be false.






                      share|cite|improve this answer























                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote










                        up vote
                        1
                        down vote









                        Clearly, some of the elements in the set must be below $4$. (Otherwise, the sum would be at least $4 cdot 6 =24$.)



                        Now we argue by contradiction. Suppose no subset has sum $3$. Then in particular, $3$ cannot occur in the set, and either $1$ or $2$ may not occur.



                        Suppose $1$ does not occur. If all elements equal $2$, the sum is $12$ instead of $13$. If at least one element is at least $4$, then the sum is at least $2+2+2+2+2+4=14$, contradiction.



                        Suppose $2$ does not occur. Note that there can be at most two $1$'s. So the total sum is at least $1+1+4+4+4+4=18$, contradiction.



                        As each case leads to a contradiction, we conclude that our initial assumption that no subset has sum $3$ must be false.






                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        Clearly, some of the elements in the set must be below $4$. (Otherwise, the sum would be at least $4 cdot 6 =24$.)



                        Now we argue by contradiction. Suppose no subset has sum $3$. Then in particular, $3$ cannot occur in the set, and either $1$ or $2$ may not occur.



                        Suppose $1$ does not occur. If all elements equal $2$, the sum is $12$ instead of $13$. If at least one element is at least $4$, then the sum is at least $2+2+2+2+2+4=14$, contradiction.



                        Suppose $2$ does not occur. Note that there can be at most two $1$'s. So the total sum is at least $1+1+4+4+4+4=18$, contradiction.



                        As each case leads to a contradiction, we conclude that our initial assumption that no subset has sum $3$ must be false.







                        share|cite|improve this answer












                        share|cite|improve this answer



                        share|cite|improve this answer










                        answered 2 days ago









                        user133281

                        13.5k22551




                        13.5k22551






















                            up vote
                            0
                            down vote













                            The set cannot contain the number 3.



                            Now consider how many of the numbers can be $ge 4$. Clearly there can not be more than three of them, or the sum would be $ge 13$. There can not be three either, because the sum of the other three numbers would be $ge 3$ and the sum of all 6 would be $ge 15$.



                            So there are at most 2 numbers $ge 4$, i.e. there are at least 4 numbers $le 2$.



                            If any of those four numbers is $1$, there is a subset ${1,2}$ or ${1,1,1}$ which sums to $3$.



                            Therefore, there are at least $4$ numbers equal to $2$, and the other numbers are all $ge 4$.



                            But that is impossible, because if all six numbers are equal to $2$ the sum is $12$, and if four or five are equal to 2 the sum is $ge 13$.






                            share|cite|improve this answer

























                              up vote
                              0
                              down vote













                              The set cannot contain the number 3.



                              Now consider how many of the numbers can be $ge 4$. Clearly there can not be more than three of them, or the sum would be $ge 13$. There can not be three either, because the sum of the other three numbers would be $ge 3$ and the sum of all 6 would be $ge 15$.



                              So there are at most 2 numbers $ge 4$, i.e. there are at least 4 numbers $le 2$.



                              If any of those four numbers is $1$, there is a subset ${1,2}$ or ${1,1,1}$ which sums to $3$.



                              Therefore, there are at least $4$ numbers equal to $2$, and the other numbers are all $ge 4$.



                              But that is impossible, because if all six numbers are equal to $2$ the sum is $12$, and if four or five are equal to 2 the sum is $ge 13$.






                              share|cite|improve this answer























                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote










                                up vote
                                0
                                down vote









                                The set cannot contain the number 3.



                                Now consider how many of the numbers can be $ge 4$. Clearly there can not be more than three of them, or the sum would be $ge 13$. There can not be three either, because the sum of the other three numbers would be $ge 3$ and the sum of all 6 would be $ge 15$.



                                So there are at most 2 numbers $ge 4$, i.e. there are at least 4 numbers $le 2$.



                                If any of those four numbers is $1$, there is a subset ${1,2}$ or ${1,1,1}$ which sums to $3$.



                                Therefore, there are at least $4$ numbers equal to $2$, and the other numbers are all $ge 4$.



                                But that is impossible, because if all six numbers are equal to $2$ the sum is $12$, and if four or five are equal to 2 the sum is $ge 13$.






                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                The set cannot contain the number 3.



                                Now consider how many of the numbers can be $ge 4$. Clearly there can not be more than three of them, or the sum would be $ge 13$. There can not be three either, because the sum of the other three numbers would be $ge 3$ and the sum of all 6 would be $ge 15$.



                                So there are at most 2 numbers $ge 4$, i.e. there are at least 4 numbers $le 2$.



                                If any of those four numbers is $1$, there is a subset ${1,2}$ or ${1,1,1}$ which sums to $3$.



                                Therefore, there are at least $4$ numbers equal to $2$, and the other numbers are all $ge 4$.



                                But that is impossible, because if all six numbers are equal to $2$ the sum is $12$, and if four or five are equal to 2 the sum is $ge 13$.







                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                share|cite|improve this answer










                                answered 2 days ago









                                alephzero

                                63137




                                63137






















                                    up vote
                                    0
                                    down vote













                                    Represent the problem in the following manner.



                                    You have 6 pigeonholes (representing each integer) and 13 pigeons (the total sum). Each hole must have at least one pigeon for the integers to be positive, so you can equivalently consider a problem with 6 pigeonholes and 7 pigeons (with some holes possibly having zero pigeons). Hey, that's kinda familiar...



                                    By PHP, in the equivalent problem at least one hole must have 2 pigeons. Further, that hole can't have exactly 2 (since that'd represent 3 as a number), so it has to have at least 3.



                                    The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.



                                    Hint: is another hole is forced to have an exact number of pigeons now?






                                    share|cite|improve this answer








                                    New contributor




                                    user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                                      up vote
                                      0
                                      down vote













                                      Represent the problem in the following manner.



                                      You have 6 pigeonholes (representing each integer) and 13 pigeons (the total sum). Each hole must have at least one pigeon for the integers to be positive, so you can equivalently consider a problem with 6 pigeonholes and 7 pigeons (with some holes possibly having zero pigeons). Hey, that's kinda familiar...



                                      By PHP, in the equivalent problem at least one hole must have 2 pigeons. Further, that hole can't have exactly 2 (since that'd represent 3 as a number), so it has to have at least 3.



                                      The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.



                                      Hint: is another hole is forced to have an exact number of pigeons now?






                                      share|cite|improve this answer








                                      New contributor




                                      user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                      Check out our Code of Conduct.




















                                        up vote
                                        0
                                        down vote










                                        up vote
                                        0
                                        down vote









                                        Represent the problem in the following manner.



                                        You have 6 pigeonholes (representing each integer) and 13 pigeons (the total sum). Each hole must have at least one pigeon for the integers to be positive, so you can equivalently consider a problem with 6 pigeonholes and 7 pigeons (with some holes possibly having zero pigeons). Hey, that's kinda familiar...



                                        By PHP, in the equivalent problem at least one hole must have 2 pigeons. Further, that hole can't have exactly 2 (since that'd represent 3 as a number), so it has to have at least 3.



                                        The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.



                                        Hint: is another hole is forced to have an exact number of pigeons now?






                                        share|cite|improve this answer








                                        New contributor




                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                        Represent the problem in the following manner.



                                        You have 6 pigeonholes (representing each integer) and 13 pigeons (the total sum). Each hole must have at least one pigeon for the integers to be positive, so you can equivalently consider a problem with 6 pigeonholes and 7 pigeons (with some holes possibly having zero pigeons). Hey, that's kinda familiar...



                                        By PHP, in the equivalent problem at least one hole must have 2 pigeons. Further, that hole can't have exactly 2 (since that'd represent 3 as a number), so it has to have at least 3.



                                        The rest is left as an exercise for the reader.



                                        Hint: is another hole is forced to have an exact number of pigeons now?







                                        share|cite|improve this answer








                                        New contributor




                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                        share|cite|improve this answer



                                        share|cite|improve this answer






                                        New contributor




                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.









                                        answered 2 days ago









                                        user619010

                                        1




                                        1




                                        New contributor




                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.





                                        New contributor





                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






                                        user619010 is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                                        Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                                            up vote
                                            0
                                            down vote













                                            Note that since the overall sum is odd, you must have at least one odd number in your set (collection) of six. You must also have at least one even number, because the sum of six odd numbers would be even. That cuts down the possibilities quite quickly.



                                            Suppose there were a contradiction.



                                            Amongst odd numbers you can't have $3$ and if you have $1$ you can't have $2$ among the even numbers.



                                            So either your smallest odd number is at least $5$ (and this is the only odd number, since three would take you over total). But then the evens would have to at least $10$ (five twos is the minimum) ...



                                            Or you have at least one $1$. You can't have three ones, and you can have at most three odd (since only two can be less than $5$ and five odds would have to include three greater than $4$). The lowest total for evens, given there are no $2$s in this case, would be at least three fours = $12$, and you can't fit six in here either.



                                            So neither case is possible, and there must be a sum of $3$.






                                            share|cite|improve this answer

























                                              up vote
                                              0
                                              down vote













                                              Note that since the overall sum is odd, you must have at least one odd number in your set (collection) of six. You must also have at least one even number, because the sum of six odd numbers would be even. That cuts down the possibilities quite quickly.



                                              Suppose there were a contradiction.



                                              Amongst odd numbers you can't have $3$ and if you have $1$ you can't have $2$ among the even numbers.



                                              So either your smallest odd number is at least $5$ (and this is the only odd number, since three would take you over total). But then the evens would have to at least $10$ (five twos is the minimum) ...



                                              Or you have at least one $1$. You can't have three ones, and you can have at most three odd (since only two can be less than $5$ and five odds would have to include three greater than $4$). The lowest total for evens, given there are no $2$s in this case, would be at least three fours = $12$, and you can't fit six in here either.



                                              So neither case is possible, and there must be a sum of $3$.






                                              share|cite|improve this answer























                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote










                                                up vote
                                                0
                                                down vote









                                                Note that since the overall sum is odd, you must have at least one odd number in your set (collection) of six. You must also have at least one even number, because the sum of six odd numbers would be even. That cuts down the possibilities quite quickly.



                                                Suppose there were a contradiction.



                                                Amongst odd numbers you can't have $3$ and if you have $1$ you can't have $2$ among the even numbers.



                                                So either your smallest odd number is at least $5$ (and this is the only odd number, since three would take you over total). But then the evens would have to at least $10$ (five twos is the minimum) ...



                                                Or you have at least one $1$. You can't have three ones, and you can have at most three odd (since only two can be less than $5$ and five odds would have to include three greater than $4$). The lowest total for evens, given there are no $2$s in this case, would be at least three fours = $12$, and you can't fit six in here either.



                                                So neither case is possible, and there must be a sum of $3$.






                                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                                Note that since the overall sum is odd, you must have at least one odd number in your set (collection) of six. You must also have at least one even number, because the sum of six odd numbers would be even. That cuts down the possibilities quite quickly.



                                                Suppose there were a contradiction.



                                                Amongst odd numbers you can't have $3$ and if you have $1$ you can't have $2$ among the even numbers.



                                                So either your smallest odd number is at least $5$ (and this is the only odd number, since three would take you over total). But then the evens would have to at least $10$ (five twos is the minimum) ...



                                                Or you have at least one $1$. You can't have three ones, and you can have at most three odd (since only two can be less than $5$ and five odds would have to include three greater than $4$). The lowest total for evens, given there are no $2$s in this case, would be at least three fours = $12$, and you can't fit six in here either.



                                                So neither case is possible, and there must be a sum of $3$.







                                                share|cite|improve this answer












                                                share|cite|improve this answer



                                                share|cite|improve this answer










                                                answered 2 days ago









                                                Mark Bennet

                                                79.9k980178




                                                79.9k980178















                                                    Popular posts from this blog

                                                    Quarter-circle Tiles

                                                    build a pushdown automaton that recognizes the reverse language of a given pushdown automaton?

                                                    Mont Emei