Problems

---

Solution:

1. \(\overrightarrow{P_{1}P_{2}}=\overrightarrow{P_{5}P_{4}}\) is equivalent to \(z_2 - z_1 = z_4 - z_5\). \(\overrightarrow{P_{2}P_{3}}=\overrightarrow{P_{6}P_{5}}\) is equivalent to \(z_3-z_2 = z_5 - z_6\).
2. \(\overrightarrow{P_{2}P_{4}}\) is perpendicular to \(\overrightarrow{P_{3}P_{6}}\,\) is equivalent to \(\frac{z_4 - z_2}{z_6-z_3} \in i\mathbb{R}\)

If \(z_2 - z_1 =z_4 - z_5\) and \(z_3-z_2 = z_5 - z_6\) then adding we get \(z_3 - z_1 = z_4 - z_6\) or \(z_4 - z_3 = z_6-z_1\), which is equivalent to \(\overrightarrow{P_{3}P_{4}}=\overrightarrow{P_{1}P_{6}}\,\). \(\textrm{Re}(z) > 1, \textrm{Re}(w) < 0, \textrm{Re}(z) +\textrm{Re}(w)=1\). (We only need one of the first two constraints, since the other is implied by the former). Since \(\overrightarrow{P_{2}P_{4}}\) is perpendicular to \(\overrightarrow{P_{3}P_{6}}\,\) we must have that \(\textrm{Im}(z) = \textrm{Im}(w)\). Combined with the vector logic we must have that \(\textrm{Im}(z) = \frac12\). Let \(z = a + \frac12i\) and \(w = (1-a) + \frac12i\). Since \(w - 1 = k(3-2i)(z-1)\) (the angle constraint) we must have that: \begin{align*} &&-a+\frac12i &= k(3-2i)((a-1) \frac12i) \\ &&&= k( 3 a - 2+(\frac72 - 2 a)i) \\ \Rightarrow && \frac{3a-2}{-a} &= \frac{\frac72-2a}{\frac12} \\ \Rightarrow && 3a-2&= 4a^2-7a \\ \Rightarrow && 0 &= 4a^2-10a+2 \\ \Rightarrow && a &= \frac{5 \pm \sqrt{17}}{4} \end{align*} Since \(a > 1, a = \frac{5 +\sqrt{17}}{4}\) and the distance is: \begin{align*} \left | z - w \right | &= | a+\frac12i - ((1-a) +\frac12i ) | \\ &= |2a-1| \\ &= \frac{5+\sqrt{17}}{2}-1 \\ &= \frac{3+\sqrt{17}}{2} \end{align*}

---

Solution: Let \(f(x) = ax^2 + bx + c\) then \begin{align*} f'(x) &= 2ax + b \\ f(0) &= c \\ f(1) &= a+b+c \\ f(-1) &= a-b+c \\ f(1)+f(-1) &= 2(a+c) \\ f(1)-f(-1) &= 2b \\ f'(x) &= x(f(1)+f(-1)) + \frac12 (f(1) - f(-1)) - 2f(0)x \end{align*} as required. Since \(f'(x)\) is a straight line, the maximum value is either at \(1, -1\) or it's constant and either end suffices. \begin{align*} |f'(1)| & \leq |f(1)|\frac{3}{2} + |f(-1)| \frac12 + 2 |f(0)| \\ &\leq \frac{3}{2} + \frac12 + 2 \\ &= 4 \\ \\ |f'(-1)| & \leq |f(1)|\frac{1}{2} + |f(-1)| \frac32 + 2 |f(0)| \\ &\leq \frac{3}{2} + \frac12 + 2 \\ &= 4 \\ \end{align*} Therefore \(|f'(x)| \leq 4\). Suppose \(|f'(x)| = 4\) for some value in \(x \in [-1,1]\), then it must be either \(-1\) or \(1\). If \(f'(1) = 4\) then \(f(1) = 1, f(-1) = 1, f(0) = -1\) so \(f(x) = 1+ k(x^2-1) \Rightarrow f(x) = 1+2(x^2-1) = 2x^2 -1\). If \(f'(-1) = 4\) then \(f(1) = -1, f(-1) = -1, f(0) = 1 \Rightarrow f(x) = -2x^2 + 1\)

---

Solution: Let \(\mathbf{a}\) denote the vector position of \(A\) and similarly for \(B, C, D\). Then we know that \((\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{a})\cdot(\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{a})=(\mathbf{c}-\mathbf{d})\cdot(\mathbf{c}-\mathbf{d})\) and \((\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{c})\cdot(\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{c})=(\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{d})\cdot(\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{d})\). Subtracting these two equations we see that \(|\mathbf{a}|^2 -2\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{b}+2\mathbf{c}\cdot\mathbf{b} - |\mathbf{c}|^2 = |\mathbf{c}|^2-2\mathbf{c}\cdot\mathbf{d}+2\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{d}-|\mathbf{a}|^2\) or \(2|\mathbf{a}|^2 -2\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{b}+2\mathbf{c}\cdot\mathbf{b} - 2|\mathbf{c}|^2 +2\mathbf{c}\cdot\mathbf{d}-2\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{d}=0\) The midpoints of the diagonals \(AC\) and \(BD\) are \(\frac{\mathbf{a}+\mathbf{c}}{2}\) and \(\frac{\mathbf{b}+\mathbf{d}}{2}\), so the line is parallel to: \(\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{b}+\mathbf{c}-\mathbf{d}\). The diagonals are parallel to \(\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{c}\) and \(\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{d}\). So it suffices to prove that \((\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{b}+\mathbf{c}-\mathbf{d}) \cdot (\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{c}) = 0\) (since the other will follow by symmetry, \begin{align*} (\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{b}+\mathbf{c}-\mathbf{d}) \cdot (\mathbf{a}-\mathbf{c}) &= |\mathbf{a}|^2-\mathbf{a}\cdot\mathbf{b}-\mathbf{a}\cdot \mathbf{d}+\mathbf{b}\cdot \mathbf{c}-|\mathbf{c}|^2+\mathbf{c}\cdot \mathbf{d} \\ \end{align*} But this is exactly half the equation we determined earlier, so we are done.

---

Solution:

1. \begin{align*} \int_{1}^{\mathrm{e}}\frac{\ln x}{x^{2}}\,\mathrm{d}x &= \left [-\frac{\ln x}{x} \right]_1^e + \int_1^e \frac{1}{x^2} \, \d x \\ &= -\frac{1}{e} + \left [ -\frac{1}{x} \right]_1^e \\ &= 1 - \frac{2}{e} \end{align*}
2. \begin{align*} \int\frac{\cos x}{\sin x\sqrt{1+\sin x}}\,\mathrm{d}x &= \int \frac{2u}{(u^2-1)u} \d u \tag{\(u^2 = 1+\sin x\)} \\ &= \int \frac{1}{u-1} - \frac{1}{u+1} \d u \\ &= \ln(u-1) - \ln (u+1) + C \\ &= \ln \l \frac{u-1}{u+1} \r + C \\ &= \ln \l \frac{\sqrt{\sin x + 1} + 1}{\sqrt{\sin x + 1} -1} \r + C \end{align*}

---

Solution:

The initial velocity is \(\begin{pmatrix} v \cos \theta \\ v \sin \theta \end{pmatrix}\). The trajectory will be: \(\begin{pmatrix} x_0 + (v \cos \theta) t \\ (v \sin \theta)t -\frac12 g t^2 \end{pmatrix}\) we must have that for some time \(t\), this is equal to \(\begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ h \end{pmatrix}\) So \(t = -\frac{x_0}{v \cos \theta}\) and so \begin{align*} &&h &= (v \sin \theta)t -\frac12 g t^2 \\ &&&= -x_0\tan \theta - \frac12 g \frac{x_0^2}{v^2 \cos^2 \theta} \\ &&&= -x_0\tan \theta - \frac{g}{2v^2 \cos^2 \theta}x_0^2 \\ &&&= -x_0\tan \theta - \frac{g}{2v^2} \sec^2 \theta x_0^2 \\ &&&= -x_0\tan \theta - \frac{g}{2v^2} (1+\tan^2 \theta )x_0^2 \\ &&&= -\l \frac{\sqrt{g}x_0}{\sqrt{2}v}\tan \theta +\frac{\sqrt{2}v}{2\sqrt{g}}\r^2+\frac{v^2}{2g}-\frac{g}{2v^2}x_0^2 \\ \Rightarrow && \frac{g}{2v^2}x_0^2 &= \frac{v^2}{2g}-h-\l \frac{\sqrt{g}x_0}{\sqrt{2}v}\tan \theta +\frac{\sqrt{2}v}{2\sqrt{g}}\r^2 \\ \Rightarrow && x_0^2 &= \frac{v^2(v^2-2gh)}{g^2}-K^2 \end{align*} Therefore \(\displaystyle |x_0| \leq \frac{v}{g}\sqrt{v^2-2gh}\)

---

Solution:

Splitting the arc up into strips of width \(\delta \theta\), then we must have \begin{align*} && \sum r\cos \theta (r \delta \theta) &= \bar{x}\sum (r \delta \theta) \\ \lim_{\delta \theta \to 0}: && \int_{-\theta}^{\theta} r^2 \cos \theta \d \theta &= \bar{x}2 \theta r \\ \Rightarrow && 2r^2 \sin \theta &= \bar{x} 2 \theta r \\ \Rightarrow && \bar{x} &= \frac{r\sin \theta}{\theta} \end{align*} The centre of mass will lie on the line of symmetry. It also must lie at the center of the base of the semi-circle (see diagram). Using a coordinate frame where that point is the origin we must have \begin{align*} && 0 &= -2r \cdot 2h - 4h \cdot h + \pi r \frac{r}{\frac{\pi}{2}} \\ &&&= -4rh-4h^2+2r^2\\ \Rightarrow && 0 &= r^2-2rh-h^2 \\ \Rightarrow && \frac{r}{h} &= 1 \pm \sqrt{3} \\ \Rightarrow && r &= (1+\sqrt{3})h \\ && h & = \frac12 (\sqrt{3}-1) r \end{align*}

---

Solution: Suppose she applies a force of magnitude \(\frac{1}{2}F(V^{2}+v^{2})/V^{2}\) backwards, then \begin{align*} && M v \frac{dv}{dx} &= -\frac{1}{2}F(V^{2}+v^{2})/V^{2} \\ \Rightarrow && M\int_{V}^0 \frac{2v}{V^2+ v^2} \d v &= - \frac{F}{V^2} x \\ \Rightarrow && M \left [ -\log(V^2+v^2) \right]_0^V &= -\frac{Fx}{V^2} \\ \Rightarrow && -M \ln 2&= -\frac{Fx}{V^2} \end{align*} Therefore she will stop quickly enough if \(d > \frac{V^2M \ln 2}{F}\) If she attempts to use the right-angled method, then she will travel a distance at most \(r\) where \(r\) is the radius of her circle: \begin{align*} && F &= M \frac{V^2}{r} \\ \Rightarrow && r &= \frac{MV^2}{F} \end{align*} Therefore she can always avoid the wall if \(d > \frac{MV^2}{F}\). There are two potential issues with being a particle. Firstly we would need to account for any variation in the distance to the wall (which could be accounted for by changing \(d\)). Secondly when she enters circular motion she will rotate and therefore we might need to consider her inertia as well as just her velocity when modelling.

---

Solution: In the initial position, since the system is in equilibrium the tension in the two ropes must be \(500g\). Therefore since \(T = \frac{\lambda x}{l} \Rightarrow x = \frac{10 \cdot 500 g}{490\, 000} = \frac1{10}\) so the initial extension is \(\frac1{10}\) By conservation of momentum, if the initial speed of the plank + Nellie is \(V\), we must have \(4000 \cdot 5 = 5000 V \Rightarrow V = 4\) \begin{array}{ccc} & \text{GPE} & \text{EPE} & \text{KE} \\ \hline \text{Initially} & 5000gh & 2 \cdot \frac12 \frac{\lambda}{l} \frac{1}{100} & \frac12 \cdot 5000 \cdot 4^2 \\ & 49\,000h & 490 & 40\,000 \\ \text{Finally} & 0 & 2 \cdot \frac12 \frac{\lambda}{l} (h + \frac1{10})^2 & 0 \\ & 0 & 49\,000 (h+\frac1{10})^2 & 0 \end{array} By conservation of energy, we can set up a quadratic: \begin{align*} && 49\,000 (h+\frac1{10})^2 &= 49\,000h + 40\,490 \\ \Rightarrow && 49\,000(h + \frac1{10})^2 &= 49\,000(h + \frac1{10})+35\, 590 \\ \Rightarrow&& h + \frac1{10} &= 1.488092\cdots \\ \Rightarrow && h &= 1.49 \,\, (3\text{ s.f.}) \end{align*} When she gets off the plank, it will move according to: \begin{align*} \text{N2}(\uparrow): && \frac{\lambda x}{l} -1000g &= -1000 \ddot{x} \\ && 49 x-g &= -\ddot{x} \\ \Rightarrow && x &= A \sin 7t + B \cos 7t + 0.2 \\ && x(0) = 1.49, &x'(0) = 0 \\ \Rightarrow && B = -1.69, & A=0 \end{align*} If we continued under this motion the string would definitely reach a point \(0.1\) above \(0\), and therefore the ropes would go slack.

---

Solution: Let \(X \sim N(0,1)\), and $\displaystyle X_{M}=\begin{cases} X & \text{if }X < M,\\ M & \text{if }X\geqslant M. \end{cases} $. Then we can calculate: \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}[X_M] &= \int_{-\infty}^M xf_X(x)\,dx + M\mathbb{P}(X \geq M) \\ &= \int_{-\infty}^M x \frac1{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac12x^2}\,dx + M\mathbb{P}(X \geq M) \\ &= \left [ -\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}e^{-\frac12x^2} \right ]_{-\infty}^M + M (1-\mathbb{P}(X < M)) \\ &= -\phi(M) + M(1-\Phi(M)) \end{align*} Let \(B \sim B\left (1024, \frac12 \right)\) be the number of potential bus passengers. Then \(B \approx N(512, 256) = N(512, 16^2)\) which is a good approximation since both \(np\) and \(nq\) are large. The question is asking us, how much additional profit would the bus company get if they ran an additional bus. Currently each week they is (on average) \(512\) passengers worth of demand, but they can only supply \(496\) seats, so we should expect that there is demand for another bus. The question is how much that demand is worth. Using the first part of the question, we can see that their profit is something like a `capped normal', \(X_M\), except we are scaled and with a different cap. So we are interested in $\displaystyle Y_{M}=\begin{cases} B & \mbox{if }B< M,\\ M & \mbox{if }B\geqslant M. \end{cases}\(, but since \)B \approx N\left (512,16^2\right)$ this is similar to \begin{align*} Y_{M}&=\begin{cases} 16X+512 & \mbox{if }16X+512< M,\\ M & \mbox{if }16X+512\geq M. \end{cases} \\ &= \begin{cases} 16X+512 & \mbox{if }X< \frac{M-512}{16},\\ M & \mbox{if }X \geq \frac{M-512}{16}. \end{cases} \\ &= 16X_{\frac{M-512}{16}} + 512\end{align*} We are interested in \(\mathbb{E}[Y_{16\times31}]\) and \(\mathbb{E}[Y_{17\times31}]\), which are \(16\mathbb{E}[X_{-1}]+512\) and \(16\mathbb{E}[Y_{\frac{15}{16}}]+512\) Since \(\frac{15}{16} \approx 1\), lets look at \(16(\mathbb{E}[X_1] - \mathbb{E}[X_{-1}])\) \begin{align*} \mathbb{E}[X_1] - \mathbb{E}[X_{-1}] &= \left ( -\phi(1) + 1-\Phi(1)\right) - \left ( - \phi(-1) -(1 - \Phi(-1)) \right ) \\ &= -\phi(1) + \phi(-1) + 1-\Phi(1) + 1 - \Phi(-1) \\ &= 1 - \Phi(1) + \Phi(1) \\ &= 1 \end{align*} Therefore the extra \(31\) will fill roughly \(16\) of them. (This is a slight overestimate, which is worth bearing in mind). A better approximation might be that \(\mathbb{E}[X_t] - \mathbb{E}[X_{-1}] = \frac{t +1}{2}\) for \(t \approx 1\), (since we want something increasing). This would give us an approximation of \(15.5\), which is very close to the `true' answer. Therefore, over \(50\) bus runs, we should earn roughly \(800\) vloska extra from an additional bus. (Again an overestimate, and with an uncertain pay-off, they should consider offering maybe \(600\)). Since this is the future, we can quite easily calculate the exact values using the binomial distribution on a computer. This gives the true value as \(15.833\), and so they should pay up to \(791\)

---

Solution: \begin{array}{c|c|c|c} k & \P(k \text{ goals}) & \P(\geq 2k+1 \text{ fouls}) & \P(k \text{ goals and } \geq 2k+1 \text{ fouls}) \\ \hline 0 & \frac{3-|2|}{9} = \frac19 & \frac{9}{10} & \frac{9}{90}\\ 1 & \frac{3-|2-1|}{9} = \frac29 & \frac{7}{10} & \frac{14}{90} \\ 2 & \frac{3-|2-2|}{9} = \frac39 & \frac{5}{10} & \frac{15}{90} \\ 3 & \frac{3-|2-3|}{9} = \frac29 & \frac{3}{10} & \frac{6}{90} \\ 4 & \frac{3-|2-4|}{9} = \frac19 & \frac{1}{10} & \frac{1}{90} \\ \hline &&& \frac{9+14+15+6+1}{90} = \frac12 \end{array} The probability a team scores more than half its points from fouls is \(\frac12\). Letting \(X\) be the number of times a team committed \(9\) fouls, then \(X \sim B(300, p)\). Consider two hypotheses: \(H_0: p = \frac1{10}\) \(H_1: p < \frac1{10}\) Under \(H_0\), we are interested in \(\P(X \leq 9)\). Since \(300 \frac{1}{10} > 5\) it is appropriate to use a normal approximation, \(N(30, 27)\). Therefore, \begin{align*} && \P(X \leq 9) &\approx \P(3\sqrt{3}Z + 30 \leq 9.5) \\ &&&= \P( Z \leq \frac{9.5-30}{3\sqrt{3}}) \\ &&&= \P(Z \leq \frac{-20.5}{3\sqrt{3}}) \\ &&&< \P(Z \leq -\frac{7}{2}) \end{align*} Which is very small. Therefore there is good evidence to believe there has been a change in the number of fouls.