Subset of knight's move in chess.What is the Probability that a Knight stays on chessboard after N hops?Proving partial greedy property for minimal knight's path between two squares on unbounded chess boardKing and knight moving on an infinite chess boardThree knights on a 3x3 chess boardA variant of the Knight's tour problemWhat is the largest possible number of moves that can be taken to color the whole grid?Infinite Knight's TourNumber of spaces a knight may reach within $n$ moves (chess)How much of an infinite board can a N-mover reach?$6$ bishops and a knight on an infinite chessboard

List manipulation: conditional result based on variable-length sublists

Fully submerged water bath for stove top baking?

How did Lefschetz do mathematics without hands?

When casting a spell with a long casting time, what happens if you don't spend your action on a turn to continue casting?

Robots in a spaceship

What was the point of separating stdout and stderr?

How can I know if a PDF file was created via LaTeX or XeLaTeX?

Cooking a nice pan seared steak for picky eaters

Subset of knight's move in chess.

13th chords on guitar

Having to constantly redo everything because I don't know how to do it?

What election rules and voting rights are guaranteed by the US Constitution?

The Lucas argument vs the theorem-provers--who wins and why?

I just started should I accept a farewell lunch for a coworker I don't know?

Iterate over deepest values in a nested Association

What prevents a US state from colonizing a smaller state?

My colleague is constantly blaming me for his errors

Why is this double switch controlling both light circuits from both switches?

Can dual citizens open crypto exchange accounts where U.S. citizens are prohibited?

I agreed to cancel a long-planned vacation (with travel costs) due to project deadlines, but now the timeline has all changed again

When was this photo of Mission Dolores *actually* taken?

pgfmath does not work

Security Patch SUPEE-11155 - Possible issues?

How to handle async subshell exit



Subset of knight's move in chess.


What is the Probability that a Knight stays on chessboard after N hops?Proving partial greedy property for minimal knight's path between two squares on unbounded chess boardKing and knight moving on an infinite chess boardThree knights on a 3x3 chess boardA variant of the Knight's tour problemWhat is the largest possible number of moves that can be taken to color the whole grid?Infinite Knight's TourNumber of spaces a knight may reach within $n$ moves (chess)How much of an infinite board can a N-mover reach?$6$ bishops and a knight on an infinite chessboard






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








2












$begingroup$



A particle is allowed to move in the $mathbbZtimes mathbbZ$ grid by choosing any of the two jumps:



1) Move two units to right and one unit up



2) Move two units up and one unit to right.



Let $P=(30,63)$ and $Q=(100,100)$, if the particle starts at origin then?



a) $P$ is reachable but not $Q$.



b) $Q$ is reachable but not $P$.



c) Both $P$ and $Q$ are reachable.



d) Neither $P$ nor $Q$ is reachable.




I could make out that the moves given are a subset of that of a knight's in chess.
I think that it'd never be able to reach $(100,100)$ but I'm not sure of the reason. It has got to do something with the move of the knight but I cannot figure out what.



I don't have a very good idea about chess, so I'd be glad if someone could answer elaborately.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Tung
    10 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    8 hours ago

















2












$begingroup$



A particle is allowed to move in the $mathbbZtimes mathbbZ$ grid by choosing any of the two jumps:



1) Move two units to right and one unit up



2) Move two units up and one unit to right.



Let $P=(30,63)$ and $Q=(100,100)$, if the particle starts at origin then?



a) $P$ is reachable but not $Q$.



b) $Q$ is reachable but not $P$.



c) Both $P$ and $Q$ are reachable.



d) Neither $P$ nor $Q$ is reachable.




I could make out that the moves given are a subset of that of a knight's in chess.
I think that it'd never be able to reach $(100,100)$ but I'm not sure of the reason. It has got to do something with the move of the knight but I cannot figure out what.



I don't have a very good idea about chess, so I'd be glad if someone could answer elaborately.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Tung
    10 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    8 hours ago













2












2








2





$begingroup$



A particle is allowed to move in the $mathbbZtimes mathbbZ$ grid by choosing any of the two jumps:



1) Move two units to right and one unit up



2) Move two units up and one unit to right.



Let $P=(30,63)$ and $Q=(100,100)$, if the particle starts at origin then?



a) $P$ is reachable but not $Q$.



b) $Q$ is reachable but not $P$.



c) Both $P$ and $Q$ are reachable.



d) Neither $P$ nor $Q$ is reachable.




I could make out that the moves given are a subset of that of a knight's in chess.
I think that it'd never be able to reach $(100,100)$ but I'm not sure of the reason. It has got to do something with the move of the knight but I cannot figure out what.



I don't have a very good idea about chess, so I'd be glad if someone could answer elaborately.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





A particle is allowed to move in the $mathbbZtimes mathbbZ$ grid by choosing any of the two jumps:



1) Move two units to right and one unit up



2) Move two units up and one unit to right.



Let $P=(30,63)$ and $Q=(100,100)$, if the particle starts at origin then?



a) $P$ is reachable but not $Q$.



b) $Q$ is reachable but not $P$.



c) Both $P$ and $Q$ are reachable.



d) Neither $P$ nor $Q$ is reachable.




I could make out that the moves given are a subset of that of a knight's in chess.
I think that it'd never be able to reach $(100,100)$ but I'm not sure of the reason. It has got to do something with the move of the knight but I cannot figure out what.



I don't have a very good idea about chess, so I'd be glad if someone could answer elaborately.







combinatorics chessboard






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 59 mins ago









Joseph Sible

1516 bronze badges




1516 bronze badges










asked 10 hours ago









TapiTapi

3281 silver badge14 bronze badges




3281 silver badge14 bronze badges







  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Tung
    10 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    8 hours ago












  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Tung
    10 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
    $endgroup$
    – Ross Millikan
    8 hours ago







1




1




$begingroup$
Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
$endgroup$
– Brian Tung
10 hours ago




$begingroup$
Although the motivation of this problem is the movement of a chess piece, the problem is not really about chess; all you need is logic and rules $1$ and $2$ above. (In actual chess, the knight can make up to eight different moves, with the $1$ and $2$ unit increments replaced by $pm1$ and $pm2$.)
$endgroup$
– Brian Tung
10 hours ago












$begingroup$
@BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
8 hours ago




$begingroup$
@BrianTung: Good point, and as the answers show this allows many fewer squares to be reached because the sum $bmod 3$ of the coordinates is maintained. The particle cannot go backwards in either direction, so both coordinates are monotonic.
$endgroup$
– Ross Millikan
8 hours ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















10












$begingroup$

Both possible moves increase the sum of coordinates by $3$, so any reachable position must have the sum of coordinates a multiple of $3$. This means $Q$ is not reachable, since its sum of coordinates is $200$, not divisible by $3$.



$P$ is also not reachable – to reach an $x$-coordinate of $30$ it must make at most $30$ jumps, which means that the highest $y$-coordinate it could reach is $2×30=60<63$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
    $endgroup$
    – Chromatix
    1 hour ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
    $endgroup$
    – Parcly Taxel
    39 mins ago



















8












$begingroup$

The above posts are certainly sufficient answers, but for fun I thought I would precisely characterize the set of points that can be reached from the origin.



Note that performing a move of type (1) amounts to adding $(2,1)$ to the particle's position vector, and, likewise, a move of type (2) amounts to adding $(1,2)$ to the particle's position vector. Therefore the points the particle can reach from the origin are precisely those points of the form
$$
n(1,2) + m(2,1) = (n + 2m, 2n + m)
$$

for nonnegative integers $n,m$. This is a precise characterization of the accessible points, but it isn't very easy to check.



It turns out that the much easier to check set of conditions



  1. $a + b$ is divisible by $3$


  2. $2a geq b geq fraca2$


are necessary and sufficient for a point $(a,b)$ to be accessible.



To see this, suppose $(a,b)$ is accessible. Then there exist nonnegative integers $n,m$ such that
beginalign
n + 2m &= a\
2n + m &= b
endalign

Thus
$$
a + b = 3n + 3m = 3(n + m)
$$

which, since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, shows that $a + b$ is divisible by $3$. Solving for $n$ and $m$, we find
beginalign
n &= frac13(2b - a) \
m &= frac13(2a - b)
endalign

Since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, we have
beginalign
0 &leq frac13(2b - a) \
0 &leq frac13(2a - b)
endalign

The first of these inequalities implies $b geq fraca2$, and the second implies $b leq 2a$, i.e. $2a geq b geq fraca2$.



Conversely, suppose that conditions 1 and 2 hold for some point $(a,b)$. By condition 1, there exists an integer $k$ such that $a + b = 3k$. Take $n = b - k$ and $m = a - k$. Note that $k = fraca + b3$. We compute
beginalign
n &= b - k = b - fraca + b3 = frac2b - a3 geq frac2fraca2 - a3 = fraca - a3 = 0 \
m &= a - k = a - fraca + b3 = frac2a - b3 geq frac2a - 2a3 = 0
endalign

Thus, $n$ and $m$ are nonnegative integers. Moreover
beginalign
(n + 2m, 2n + m) &= ((b - k) + 2(a - k) , 2(b - k) + (a - k)) = (b + 2a - 3k, 2b + a - 3k)
\&= (b + a + a - 3k, b + b + a - 3k) = (3k + a - 3k, b + 3k - 3k) = (a,b)
endalign

By our original characterization of the accessible points, this shows that $(a,b)$ is an accessible point.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
    $endgroup$
    – Tapi
    8 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
    $endgroup$
    – Cade Reinberger
    1 hour ago



















4












$begingroup$

Note that starting from $(x,y)$ we can reach $(X,Y)in(x+2,y+1),(x+1,y+2)$. In any case if $X+Y-(x+y)$ is divisible by $3$. This means that if we start from the origin $(0,0)$ then we can not reach $(X,Y)$ if $X+Y$ is not divisible by $3$. So you are correct $(100,100)$ is not reachable.



What about $(30,63)$?






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$















    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3276351%2fsubset-of-knights-move-in-chess%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    10












    $begingroup$

    Both possible moves increase the sum of coordinates by $3$, so any reachable position must have the sum of coordinates a multiple of $3$. This means $Q$ is not reachable, since its sum of coordinates is $200$, not divisible by $3$.



    $P$ is also not reachable – to reach an $x$-coordinate of $30$ it must make at most $30$ jumps, which means that the highest $y$-coordinate it could reach is $2×30=60<63$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
      $endgroup$
      – Chromatix
      1 hour ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
      $endgroup$
      – Parcly Taxel
      39 mins ago
















    10












    $begingroup$

    Both possible moves increase the sum of coordinates by $3$, so any reachable position must have the sum of coordinates a multiple of $3$. This means $Q$ is not reachable, since its sum of coordinates is $200$, not divisible by $3$.



    $P$ is also not reachable – to reach an $x$-coordinate of $30$ it must make at most $30$ jumps, which means that the highest $y$-coordinate it could reach is $2×30=60<63$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
      $endgroup$
      – Chromatix
      1 hour ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
      $endgroup$
      – Parcly Taxel
      39 mins ago














    10












    10








    10





    $begingroup$

    Both possible moves increase the sum of coordinates by $3$, so any reachable position must have the sum of coordinates a multiple of $3$. This means $Q$ is not reachable, since its sum of coordinates is $200$, not divisible by $3$.



    $P$ is also not reachable – to reach an $x$-coordinate of $30$ it must make at most $30$ jumps, which means that the highest $y$-coordinate it could reach is $2×30=60<63$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    Both possible moves increase the sum of coordinates by $3$, so any reachable position must have the sum of coordinates a multiple of $3$. This means $Q$ is not reachable, since its sum of coordinates is $200$, not divisible by $3$.



    $P$ is also not reachable – to reach an $x$-coordinate of $30$ it must make at most $30$ jumps, which means that the highest $y$-coordinate it could reach is $2×30=60<63$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 10 hours ago









    Parcly TaxelParcly Taxel

    46.9k13 gold badges77 silver badges116 bronze badges




    46.9k13 gold badges77 silver badges116 bronze badges











    • $begingroup$
      It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
      $endgroup$
      – Chromatix
      1 hour ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
      $endgroup$
      – Parcly Taxel
      39 mins ago

















    • $begingroup$
      It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
      $endgroup$
      – Chromatix
      1 hour ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
      $endgroup$
      – Parcly Taxel
      39 mins ago
















    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
    $endgroup$
    – Chromatix
    1 hour ago




    $begingroup$
    It may also be worth exploring briefly why this logic doesn't apply to a real chess knight, which isn't restricted to the upper-right quadrant of movement and can thereby reach every square of the board. In the upper-left and lower-right quadrants the coordinate sum changes by ±1, while in the lower-left quadrant it decreases by 3.
    $endgroup$
    – Chromatix
    1 hour ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
    $endgroup$
    – Parcly Taxel
    39 mins ago





    $begingroup$
    @Chromatix That is simply because you can reach $(0,1)$ with three ordinary knight moves, and because you can here reflect those moves to reach $(pm1,0)$ and $(0,pm1)$, hence every square.
    $endgroup$
    – Parcly Taxel
    39 mins ago














    8












    $begingroup$

    The above posts are certainly sufficient answers, but for fun I thought I would precisely characterize the set of points that can be reached from the origin.



    Note that performing a move of type (1) amounts to adding $(2,1)$ to the particle's position vector, and, likewise, a move of type (2) amounts to adding $(1,2)$ to the particle's position vector. Therefore the points the particle can reach from the origin are precisely those points of the form
    $$
    n(1,2) + m(2,1) = (n + 2m, 2n + m)
    $$

    for nonnegative integers $n,m$. This is a precise characterization of the accessible points, but it isn't very easy to check.



    It turns out that the much easier to check set of conditions



    1. $a + b$ is divisible by $3$


    2. $2a geq b geq fraca2$


    are necessary and sufficient for a point $(a,b)$ to be accessible.



    To see this, suppose $(a,b)$ is accessible. Then there exist nonnegative integers $n,m$ such that
    beginalign
    n + 2m &= a\
    2n + m &= b
    endalign

    Thus
    $$
    a + b = 3n + 3m = 3(n + m)
    $$

    which, since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, shows that $a + b$ is divisible by $3$. Solving for $n$ and $m$, we find
    beginalign
    n &= frac13(2b - a) \
    m &= frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    Since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, we have
    beginalign
    0 &leq frac13(2b - a) \
    0 &leq frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    The first of these inequalities implies $b geq fraca2$, and the second implies $b leq 2a$, i.e. $2a geq b geq fraca2$.



    Conversely, suppose that conditions 1 and 2 hold for some point $(a,b)$. By condition 1, there exists an integer $k$ such that $a + b = 3k$. Take $n = b - k$ and $m = a - k$. Note that $k = fraca + b3$. We compute
    beginalign
    n &= b - k = b - fraca + b3 = frac2b - a3 geq frac2fraca2 - a3 = fraca - a3 = 0 \
    m &= a - k = a - fraca + b3 = frac2a - b3 geq frac2a - 2a3 = 0
    endalign

    Thus, $n$ and $m$ are nonnegative integers. Moreover
    beginalign
    (n + 2m, 2n + m) &= ((b - k) + 2(a - k) , 2(b - k) + (a - k)) = (b + 2a - 3k, 2b + a - 3k)
    \&= (b + a + a - 3k, b + b + a - 3k) = (3k + a - 3k, b + 3k - 3k) = (a,b)
    endalign

    By our original characterization of the accessible points, this shows that $(a,b)$ is an accessible point.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
      $endgroup$
      – Tapi
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
      $endgroup$
      – Cade Reinberger
      1 hour ago
















    8












    $begingroup$

    The above posts are certainly sufficient answers, but for fun I thought I would precisely characterize the set of points that can be reached from the origin.



    Note that performing a move of type (1) amounts to adding $(2,1)$ to the particle's position vector, and, likewise, a move of type (2) amounts to adding $(1,2)$ to the particle's position vector. Therefore the points the particle can reach from the origin are precisely those points of the form
    $$
    n(1,2) + m(2,1) = (n + 2m, 2n + m)
    $$

    for nonnegative integers $n,m$. This is a precise characterization of the accessible points, but it isn't very easy to check.



    It turns out that the much easier to check set of conditions



    1. $a + b$ is divisible by $3$


    2. $2a geq b geq fraca2$


    are necessary and sufficient for a point $(a,b)$ to be accessible.



    To see this, suppose $(a,b)$ is accessible. Then there exist nonnegative integers $n,m$ such that
    beginalign
    n + 2m &= a\
    2n + m &= b
    endalign

    Thus
    $$
    a + b = 3n + 3m = 3(n + m)
    $$

    which, since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, shows that $a + b$ is divisible by $3$. Solving for $n$ and $m$, we find
    beginalign
    n &= frac13(2b - a) \
    m &= frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    Since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, we have
    beginalign
    0 &leq frac13(2b - a) \
    0 &leq frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    The first of these inequalities implies $b geq fraca2$, and the second implies $b leq 2a$, i.e. $2a geq b geq fraca2$.



    Conversely, suppose that conditions 1 and 2 hold for some point $(a,b)$. By condition 1, there exists an integer $k$ such that $a + b = 3k$. Take $n = b - k$ and $m = a - k$. Note that $k = fraca + b3$. We compute
    beginalign
    n &= b - k = b - fraca + b3 = frac2b - a3 geq frac2fraca2 - a3 = fraca - a3 = 0 \
    m &= a - k = a - fraca + b3 = frac2a - b3 geq frac2a - 2a3 = 0
    endalign

    Thus, $n$ and $m$ are nonnegative integers. Moreover
    beginalign
    (n + 2m, 2n + m) &= ((b - k) + 2(a - k) , 2(b - k) + (a - k)) = (b + 2a - 3k, 2b + a - 3k)
    \&= (b + a + a - 3k, b + b + a - 3k) = (3k + a - 3k, b + 3k - 3k) = (a,b)
    endalign

    By our original characterization of the accessible points, this shows that $(a,b)$ is an accessible point.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$












    • $begingroup$
      Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
      $endgroup$
      – Tapi
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
      $endgroup$
      – Cade Reinberger
      1 hour ago














    8












    8








    8





    $begingroup$

    The above posts are certainly sufficient answers, but for fun I thought I would precisely characterize the set of points that can be reached from the origin.



    Note that performing a move of type (1) amounts to adding $(2,1)$ to the particle's position vector, and, likewise, a move of type (2) amounts to adding $(1,2)$ to the particle's position vector. Therefore the points the particle can reach from the origin are precisely those points of the form
    $$
    n(1,2) + m(2,1) = (n + 2m, 2n + m)
    $$

    for nonnegative integers $n,m$. This is a precise characterization of the accessible points, but it isn't very easy to check.



    It turns out that the much easier to check set of conditions



    1. $a + b$ is divisible by $3$


    2. $2a geq b geq fraca2$


    are necessary and sufficient for a point $(a,b)$ to be accessible.



    To see this, suppose $(a,b)$ is accessible. Then there exist nonnegative integers $n,m$ such that
    beginalign
    n + 2m &= a\
    2n + m &= b
    endalign

    Thus
    $$
    a + b = 3n + 3m = 3(n + m)
    $$

    which, since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, shows that $a + b$ is divisible by $3$. Solving for $n$ and $m$, we find
    beginalign
    n &= frac13(2b - a) \
    m &= frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    Since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, we have
    beginalign
    0 &leq frac13(2b - a) \
    0 &leq frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    The first of these inequalities implies $b geq fraca2$, and the second implies $b leq 2a$, i.e. $2a geq b geq fraca2$.



    Conversely, suppose that conditions 1 and 2 hold for some point $(a,b)$. By condition 1, there exists an integer $k$ such that $a + b = 3k$. Take $n = b - k$ and $m = a - k$. Note that $k = fraca + b3$. We compute
    beginalign
    n &= b - k = b - fraca + b3 = frac2b - a3 geq frac2fraca2 - a3 = fraca - a3 = 0 \
    m &= a - k = a - fraca + b3 = frac2a - b3 geq frac2a - 2a3 = 0
    endalign

    Thus, $n$ and $m$ are nonnegative integers. Moreover
    beginalign
    (n + 2m, 2n + m) &= ((b - k) + 2(a - k) , 2(b - k) + (a - k)) = (b + 2a - 3k, 2b + a - 3k)
    \&= (b + a + a - 3k, b + b + a - 3k) = (3k + a - 3k, b + 3k - 3k) = (a,b)
    endalign

    By our original characterization of the accessible points, this shows that $(a,b)$ is an accessible point.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    The above posts are certainly sufficient answers, but for fun I thought I would precisely characterize the set of points that can be reached from the origin.



    Note that performing a move of type (1) amounts to adding $(2,1)$ to the particle's position vector, and, likewise, a move of type (2) amounts to adding $(1,2)$ to the particle's position vector. Therefore the points the particle can reach from the origin are precisely those points of the form
    $$
    n(1,2) + m(2,1) = (n + 2m, 2n + m)
    $$

    for nonnegative integers $n,m$. This is a precise characterization of the accessible points, but it isn't very easy to check.



    It turns out that the much easier to check set of conditions



    1. $a + b$ is divisible by $3$


    2. $2a geq b geq fraca2$


    are necessary and sufficient for a point $(a,b)$ to be accessible.



    To see this, suppose $(a,b)$ is accessible. Then there exist nonnegative integers $n,m$ such that
    beginalign
    n + 2m &= a\
    2n + m &= b
    endalign

    Thus
    $$
    a + b = 3n + 3m = 3(n + m)
    $$

    which, since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, shows that $a + b$ is divisible by $3$. Solving for $n$ and $m$, we find
    beginalign
    n &= frac13(2b - a) \
    m &= frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    Since $n,m$ are nonnegative integers, we have
    beginalign
    0 &leq frac13(2b - a) \
    0 &leq frac13(2a - b)
    endalign

    The first of these inequalities implies $b geq fraca2$, and the second implies $b leq 2a$, i.e. $2a geq b geq fraca2$.



    Conversely, suppose that conditions 1 and 2 hold for some point $(a,b)$. By condition 1, there exists an integer $k$ such that $a + b = 3k$. Take $n = b - k$ and $m = a - k$. Note that $k = fraca + b3$. We compute
    beginalign
    n &= b - k = b - fraca + b3 = frac2b - a3 geq frac2fraca2 - a3 = fraca - a3 = 0 \
    m &= a - k = a - fraca + b3 = frac2a - b3 geq frac2a - 2a3 = 0
    endalign

    Thus, $n$ and $m$ are nonnegative integers. Moreover
    beginalign
    (n + 2m, 2n + m) &= ((b - k) + 2(a - k) , 2(b - k) + (a - k)) = (b + 2a - 3k, 2b + a - 3k)
    \&= (b + a + a - 3k, b + b + a - 3k) = (3k + a - 3k, b + 3k - 3k) = (a,b)
    endalign

    By our original characterization of the accessible points, this shows that $(a,b)$ is an accessible point.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered 8 hours ago









    Charles HudginsCharles Hudgins

    8358 bronze badges




    8358 bronze badges











    • $begingroup$
      Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
      $endgroup$
      – Tapi
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
      $endgroup$
      – Cade Reinberger
      1 hour ago

















    • $begingroup$
      Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
      $endgroup$
      – Tapi
      8 hours ago










    • $begingroup$
      For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
      $endgroup$
      – Cade Reinberger
      1 hour ago
















    $begingroup$
    Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
    $endgroup$
    – Tapi
    8 hours ago




    $begingroup$
    Indeed very interesting, Thank you for the exact conditions.
    $endgroup$
    – Tapi
    8 hours ago












    $begingroup$
    For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
    $endgroup$
    – Cade Reinberger
    1 hour ago





    $begingroup$
    For what it's worth you can slightly simplify (at most marginally, it's really a matter of opinion) this argument with some modular arithmetic. In particular, solving the system of linear equations for $m$ and $n$ explicitly as you've done, on may by the same logic note the necessary inequality and sum. But furthermore, one may immediately note, as is done that, if the inequality is satisfied, $m$ and $n$ will be positive, and one may also note that $2a-b equiv 2b-a equiv -(a+b) pmod 3$, so that we've produced a working pair without explicitly considering such a $k$
    $endgroup$
    – Cade Reinberger
    1 hour ago












    4












    $begingroup$

    Note that starting from $(x,y)$ we can reach $(X,Y)in(x+2,y+1),(x+1,y+2)$. In any case if $X+Y-(x+y)$ is divisible by $3$. This means that if we start from the origin $(0,0)$ then we can not reach $(X,Y)$ if $X+Y$ is not divisible by $3$. So you are correct $(100,100)$ is not reachable.



    What about $(30,63)$?






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$

















      4












      $begingroup$

      Note that starting from $(x,y)$ we can reach $(X,Y)in(x+2,y+1),(x+1,y+2)$. In any case if $X+Y-(x+y)$ is divisible by $3$. This means that if we start from the origin $(0,0)$ then we can not reach $(X,Y)$ if $X+Y$ is not divisible by $3$. So you are correct $(100,100)$ is not reachable.



      What about $(30,63)$?






      share|cite|improve this answer











      $endgroup$















        4












        4








        4





        $begingroup$

        Note that starting from $(x,y)$ we can reach $(X,Y)in(x+2,y+1),(x+1,y+2)$. In any case if $X+Y-(x+y)$ is divisible by $3$. This means that if we start from the origin $(0,0)$ then we can not reach $(X,Y)$ if $X+Y$ is not divisible by $3$. So you are correct $(100,100)$ is not reachable.



        What about $(30,63)$?






        share|cite|improve this answer











        $endgroup$



        Note that starting from $(x,y)$ we can reach $(X,Y)in(x+2,y+1),(x+1,y+2)$. In any case if $X+Y-(x+y)$ is divisible by $3$. This means that if we start from the origin $(0,0)$ then we can not reach $(X,Y)$ if $X+Y$ is not divisible by $3$. So you are correct $(100,100)$ is not reachable.



        What about $(30,63)$?







        share|cite|improve this answer














        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer








        edited 10 hours ago

























        answered 10 hours ago









        Robert ZRobert Z

        104k10 gold badges75 silver badges147 bronze badges




        104k10 gold badges75 silver badges147 bronze badges



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3276351%2fsubset-of-knights-move-in-chess%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Canceling a color specificationRandomly assigning color to Graphics3D objects?Default color for Filling in Mathematica 9Coloring specific elements of sets with a prime modified order in an array plotHow to pick a color differing significantly from the colors already in a given color list?Detection of the text colorColor numbers based on their valueCan color schemes for use with ColorData include opacity specification?My dynamic color schemes

            Invision Community Contents History See also References External links Navigation menuProprietaryinvisioncommunity.comIPS Community ForumsIPS Community Forumsthis blog entry"License Changes, IP.Board 3.4, and the Future""Interview -- Matt Mecham of Ibforums""CEO Invision Power Board, Matt Mecham Is a Liar, Thief!"IPB License Explanation 1.3, 1.3.1, 2.0, and 2.1ArchivedSecurity Fixes, Updates And Enhancements For IPB 1.3.1Archived"New Demo Accounts - Invision Power Services"the original"New Default Skin"the original"Invision Power Board 3.0.0 and Applications Released"the original"Archived copy"the original"Perpetual licenses being done away with""Release Notes - Invision Power Services""Introducing: IPS Community Suite 4!"Invision Community Release Notes

            199年 目錄 大件事 到箇年出世嗰人 到箇年死嗰人 節慶、風俗習慣 導覽選單